The Mystification of Scientific Abstraction

It becomes slightly discomforting when one recognizes the source for X-File plot lines, as not entirely derived from the creative imagination of a sci-fi writer, but extracted from real narratives in our culture. And I’m being deliberate when I mention “our culture”, rather than “sub-culture” (if subcultures truly exist anymore, but that’s another Frankfurt story), because the sentiments and attitudes conjured up by ufo’s and aliens from outer space, are not hushed aside to the margins of society. Rather, ufo’s and extraterrestrial beings are a common theme in popular culture, and the terror, hope, and ambivalence they garner, is not unlike other speculative discourses permeating the public, i.e. religion.

Thus, it is not surprising our representation of ufo’s and aliens fit the epic archetype of a greater-than-man hero. Like Zeus and the Olympian gods, their formulaic personalities, omniscient presence, and higher knowledge, is no more different than the temperamental, and all knowing ET’s.

This link between the divine and the quite literal outer-worldly, is fundamental to occult leaders and followers. The manifestations of this linkage, often seen in x-file episodes, are communities based on the mystification of scientific abstractions, and the faith of biblical text.

Though the latter is a familiar and human sentiment, the former, mystification of scientific abstraction, is a process experienced in this regime of rationality and functionalism. In a society where our rituals and routines revolve around the systems of machines and technology, skepticism and cynicism towards angry gods are justified by statistics of global warming. However, when scientific and rational logic become the dominant discourse, we forget however, that it still remains a discourse. That is, the language of science is highly esoteric and omits the public from understanding specific facts. Nonetheless, it remains the dominant discourse in which people rely and place their faith in. The ramifications of this faith thus beings to look like a blur between scientific and science fiction. When scientific inferences are interpreted as facts by the public, the result is no different then how religions and faiths are formed.

Take for example, the black box. A piece of technology that functions though we don’t know how. We accept nonetheless, that through the magic that is technology, this microwave will heat up my food- no questions ask. On a metaphysical level, the black box does not singularly point to its function, i.e. Microwave = food, rather, it points to the all mighty and omnipresence of Science. And it is these instruments of technology that make up enivorment, brings us closer to a new god, a new faith, a new transcendental enlightenment outside of archaic churches and temples.

go go gadget go

I’m finding this semester’s paradigm shift away from western ideology, towards particularly Islamic thought, an interesting route of inquiry. Of particular interests are the apparent emotions and energies invested in this debate of science and religion in Islamic societies. That is, to justify resistance or allowances of certain technologies, depends entirely on the ethics of the Qu’ran. Factors of human affect rather than technological effect seems to be of latent concern in western societies, but is central to Muslim praxis.

It sounds almost idealistic, that Islamic rationalist theology provides an encompassing yet diversified ideology to what westerns would call interdisciplinary. And according to our speaker yesterday, and Nasr’s article, “there are no categories” that house science and religion into two different spheres of thought; they are contingent on one another.

Yet, we can not deny that culture is not a static entity unsusceptible to change. As our speaker articulated with her five Muslim students of different sects, Muslim orthopraxy is diverse since ambiguity of the Qu’ran verses allow for varied interpretations. Thus, over time and space, the meaning and understanding of these verses change, and in turn instigate cultural changes.

Having said that, we also can not deny the global influences on Muslin societies. Coming from an outsider, in a contemporary context, the claim of a borderless relationship between Islam and science, seems like a nostalgic negation of globalization.
Looking back to Muslin civilization, particularly the library of Baghdad, a religio-science is apparent in the history of Islam. But after yesterday’s film which attempted to legitimize Islam via “scientific proof”, viewers can not but ignore the intent to overcome western pressures and criticism against Islamic strategic essentialism.

Attempting to address this concern in the language of western ideology, the film demonstrates that such ideology is not absent in Islamic thought. In other words, if science is used as “proof” for the Qu’ran, scientific empericalism becomes the point of reference for validation, rather than the Qu’ran. Thus, if the Qu’ran needs to be “proven” via science, rather than having science stem from Qu’ran as it did in the days of Baghdad library, then divisions of science and religion become apparent.

Thus, my concern around Nasr’s article, or rather rant, is that she fails to recognize the necessity of cultural change and the potential that may follow. One must address these factors, not deny them.