The scientific progress of the last several decades can make it seem like scientists have got most things figured out. So much so, that for many people in Western cultures science seems to have replaced religion as the main paradigm through which they look at the world. However, many people apply the scientific paradigm incorrectly and act as if:
1) anything that hasn’t been measured by science does not exist;
2) anything that science hasn’t reliably reproduced can only be attributed to chance.

This makes prospects of acknowledgement pretty bleak for non-physical phenomena like extra-sensory perception including telepathy and intuition, energy or prayer healing, and the possibility that we are souls that temporarily inhabit physical bodies. There is no proof that these things don’t exist either, so a correct scientific attitude towards non-physical phenomena should be “we don’t know for sure if these things exist or not”, or “we can neither confirm nor deny”. The correct scientific attitude is critical open-mindedness – staying open to all possibilities and not believing or denying anything until it is conclusively proven.

The dominant social attitude to non-physical phenomena is denial and ridicule. Ridicule and denial without conclusive proof have absolutely nothing to do with science – they are aggressive expressions of emotional insecurity. This can be observed in how some people react when presented with results of scientific studies: if the conclusion of the study is favourable to the person’s pleasure, comfort and convenience (ex: “chocolate can protect against tooth decay”) then the person instantly believes it without reasonable examination of the study; however, if the conclusion of the study threatens the person’s pleasure, comfort and convenience (ex: “cell phone use damages DNA in human cells”) then the person reacts with denial and ridicule without reasonable examination of the study. Both examples above cite real studies.

History teaches us that we have come to understand and use invisible forms of energy that we previously did not believe nor understand. For example, radio was invented in 1880s. Imagine going back 200 years to 1814 and trying to explain radio to the people of the day – how the invisible and silent radio waves can carry human voice and music for many kilometres and how hand-held devices can accurately receive and reproduce this sound. It wouldn’t help that loudspeakers and telephone were not invented either and you would probably encounter ridicule for your “magical fairytales”. What magical fairytales could someone from 200 years in the future tell us about their technologies? What if these technologies will also rely on invisible forms of energy that we don’t know about today? Or is today’s science at the point where no significant discoveries remain to be made?

Many people are not aware that science has yet to explain many fundamental phenomena that we experience every day, like what causes gravity. The best current scientific theory is that gravity is caused by a particle called “graviton”. A graviton has never been observed or measured.

“Big bang” is the most widely accepted scientific theory about the origin of our universe. Since the 1990s it was observed that the universe is expanding at an accelerating rate. This didn’t make sense because gravity would have been pulling solar systems towards each other for billions of years after the explosion and should theoretically be slowing the rate of expansion. To fix this discrepancy “dark energy” was invented – a hypothetical form of energy that is supposedly uniformly spread throughout the universe and exerts enough expansion pressure to counteract the work of gravitons. Dark energy has never been directly observed or measured.

There are also discrepancies between the mass of large astronomical objects determined from their gravitational effects and the mass calculated from the “luminous matter” they contain – stars, gas, and dust. To compensate for the mass that seems to be “missing” from the universe scientists invented the “dark matter”. This dark matter supposedly does not emit nor absorb light, and that should explain why we can’t directly see or measure it. But as long as we assume it is there the old equations and theories still work.

The scientists then calculated that the universe must contain 26.8% dark matter, 68.3% dark energy and 4.9% ordinary physical matter. In other words scientists themselves claim that 95% of the universe consists of things that they’ve only hypothesized about and have never actually measured or observed. This makes it worth questioning whether the scientists of our day should be regarded as the definitive authority on what exists and what doesn’t.

Applying the scientific method involves taking a belief or theory as a hypothesis and rigorously testing it, neither assuming it to be true nor false until that is conclusively proven. Applying the scientific method consistently – even when we encounter new data that threatens the correctness of our familiar beliefs, theories and behaviours – is challenging, but that is what it takes to advance our understanding and discover the truth. On the other hand, defending unproven beliefs while aggressively and illogically ridiculing data that contradicts them is called ignorance.

Using the scientific method involves adopting an attitude of critical open-mindedness and this actually supports spirituality. Being open to all possibilities but examining them critically and thoroughly is the best protection from adopting false spiritual beliefs that have little to do with reality. If spiritual truth cannot be practically tested, it may be either incorrect or not useful for everyday life. The scientific method is a practical tool for distinguishing facts from fiction.

PUBLISHED IN MAR 2014 ISSUE OF LAINGHOLM ROUNDABOUT.