Science vs. religion and history vs. theology

Although the blogs and discussions about science and religion (whether they can be reconciled, etc.) and about history and theology (how they can be separated out from each other) are intellectually interesting, I usually find them going in circles, producing more noise than clarity.

My assessment of these issues has been strongly influenced by my reading of Alternate Realities by Lawrence LeShan, the main points of which I will summarize here for those who cannot get access to this book. It has been out of print for years, but you may be able to get copies through Amazon.

LeShan posits the existence of at least 4 modes of being, distinct from each other and incorporating different rules for operation:

1. Sensory mode
2. Clairvoyant mode
3. Transpsychic mode
4. Mythic mode

For the purposes of this discussion, I will focus on the Sensory and Mythic modes.

The rules for operation of the Sensory Mode of Consciousness are:

1. “All valid information directly or indirectly comes from the senses.
2. All events happen in space and time.
3. All events have a cause.
4. Causes occur before events.
5. Events in the past can be remembered or – at least theoretically – their effects observed, but cannot be changed.
6. Events in the future can be – at least theoretically – changed.
7. Objects separate in space are separate objects; events separate in time are separate events.
8. All activity – movement – takes place through space and takes measurable time units to occur.
9. Action (movement or change of movement) takes place only when one entity is in direct contact with another.
10. All objects and events are composed of parts that can be – at least theoretically – dealt with separately.
11. When objects or events have similar parts, they can be placed in classes for a specific purpose and the entire class can be thought of and dealt with as if it were one object or event. This can also be done with classes or classes of objects or events.
12. This is the only way to regard reality. All other ways are an illusion.” Pp. 71-2

The rules for operation of the Mythic Mode of Consciousness are:

1. “There is no difference between perception and symbol, object and image, thing and name. Each is, and can be used as if it is, the other. ‘Objective’ and ‘subjective’ cannot be differentiated. There is no difference between in here and out there.
2. Anything can become identical with anything else or stand for anything else once the two have been connected. Once this connection has been made, time and space cannot break it, but an appropriate act of will, correctly expressed, can.
3. Each part of a thing is the equivalent of the whole. If you break up an object or event, each of the parts equals the whole.
4. To control the part is to control the whole. To know the real name of something is to have power over it. To manipulate the symbol of something is to manipulate the thing it stands for.
5. Space is determined by the connections between things and events. If they are connected (and therefore identical) space between them does not exist. If they are unconnected, space cannot connect them. This is irrelevant to sensory space or to geometric space.
6. Time is determined by the connections between events. If two events are the same event, time cannot separate them. If they are unconnected, time cannot connect them. This is irrelevant to clock or calendar time.
7. All events start with a specific act of will. To explain an event is to show the connection to this act of will which, in itself, needs no explanation and is inexplicable.
8. There is a substance that all things and people have to varying degrees that determines their effectiveness, their ability to influence events. It can be gathered and redistributed by appropriate behavior. Its names include ‘mana,’ ‘wakenda,’ ‘manitous,’ ‘power,’ baraka.’ It is a sort of material ‘energy’ that affects and determines the course of events. It can be used for good or evil; in itself it is neither black nor white, but gray.
9. There is no such thing as accidental. Everything has meaning and is charged with meaning. Since part and whole are one, to understand the smallest part is to understand the whole and vice versa.
10. Birth and death are a change from one form of existence to another. They are, as are sleep and wakefulness, two similar phases of the same being.
11. This is the only valid way to interpret reality.” Pp. 85-6

---

There are, of course, many consequences of these modes of consciousness.

* Each is oriented to exploring life in certain ways, which exclude many of the possibilities explored by other modes.

* Each claims to be mutually exclusive, even though we constantly switch between these modes during our daily routines.

* Each mode should be used for its primary purpose, but never be used to cross over into the world defined by a different mode. For example, adopting a mythic mode is necessary for prayer to be effective, but insisting that mythic mode concepts and practices be adopted in sensory mode situations (politics, for example) is problematic.

* “Each of these classes is a way of structuring what is out there and in here. Each has a clearly defined set of laws and a very great and profound set of implications of these laws. Each is self-consistent, organically organized, and nothing can occur while one is using it that is contrary to these laws and implications. Each of these can enable us to accomplish certain goals and to answer certain questions. Each is irrelevant to certain other questions and goals, and simply does not connect with them. Each has room within it for a great deal of individual variation in the interpretation of the reality and in its implications for behavior. Each satisfies certain parts of our needs, and when an individual does not use one of them with a whole heart, fully accepting its validity and reality, that part of him remains undernourished and his whole being is stunted in its development.” P. 71

* “You cannot twist one construction of reality to reach conclusions foreign to its laws even though the conclusions are native to the laws of another construction of reality.” P. 96

* “Some concepts just do not translate from one mode of being to another.” P. 98

* “a solution of a problem by a mode of being that is irrelevant to the problem, where the data comes from a different construction of reality from that of the solution, is going to lead you, at best, into all kinds of contradictions and to false conclusions.” P. 141

---

When I start moving to a judgment about what my mind interprets as "delusional" thinking or behavior by some religionists, I find it helpful to remember some of these distinctions. A person operating from a mythic mode perspective can say and do things that seem incredibly bizarre to me but which clearly make sense to them. Rather than assume out-of-hand that they are experiencing processor or logic errors, when I see them as operating mythically, I can appreciate the integrity of their experience for them while still not taking it on for myself.