'talk on science & spirituality, by Bhaktivedanta Institute'

[Ankur Pandey]

'talk on science & spirituality, by Bhaktivedanta Institute', 29th Jan, 6 pm at IISc. Let's see what this 'spirituality' has to offer us :|

http://www.serc.iisc.ernet.in/broadcast_messages/msg19135.html

[Aditya Manthramurthy]

On 28 January 2011 15:40, gokul <mgokul...@gmail.com> wrote:

" Science attempts to explain about the structure of the universe and
how it is functioning.  With the advancements in space and astro
sciences as well as the nano and femto sciences we have come to know
a great deal about the structure and functioning of the macro and
micro universe. However, we have still not come grip with the
complete understanding. Our attempts for a theory of everything still
eludes us."

That is science, we _don't_ know everything, that's why we still do
it. Once we have complete understanding there is no need to do science
anymore.

We may never understand everything that there is to understand:
 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1APOxsp1VFw
So, the case that we stop doing science may never arise. However that does not mean that one needs to resort to faith (see below).
 

"Our attempts
to overcome this difficulty take us to the realm of beyond
experiments and verification, to the realm of what science trying to
consciously escape, the realm of faith."

Once you go to the realm of faith alone, you can believe anything you
like. It becomes a personal thing, nothing rational and nothing about
finding the Truth. Of course faith may be very comfortable, that's a
personal preference.

"If not in a rigorous scientific way,
can they at least tell us story that can consistently and
satisfactorily
tell  WHY  the universe and we are here?"

A story can always be imagined when things aren't clear, like how it
was once thought that the earth was supported on the back of a turtle
(I think).

As you have already mentioned, a consistent story does not imply a true story. (Satisfaction about the story is relative!) Therefore, there can be multiple, contradictory narratives to the question, "why are we here?", etc. Which narrative to adopt? Why adopt one at all?

There is beauty and poetry in science too -
[0] https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Unweaving_the_Rainbow
[1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQAPmA0vnlE "Unweaving the Rainbow - Dawkins"
[2] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RExQFZzHXQ - "Poetry of Reality - Richard Dawkins and Neil degrasse Tyson"
[3] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Lm6pEhykhs - Carl Sagan's "Pale Blue Dot"

[Ankur Pandey]

Me & Vijay just returned from the talk. One of the lamest ones I've been exposed to. The saffron clad guy sporting a tilak was first introduced having masters from IITK, thereby establishing his 'enough' familiarity with science.

He gave all the beaten to death arguments, 'what was before big bang', 'why are the fundamental constants the way they are', quotes by Noble laureates mentioning that science may not or can not understand everything, etc.

And then... claimed that these objective measures of science are too narrow, & actually we are living in the dream world created by Brahma who in turn was created by Vishnu; & we have no option but to break the dream & live eternally in one of the planets (sic.) designated for us in the universe based on love (sic.)...

Somebody has star trek episodes? They're better way to waste time.