Madeline Bunting has penned her last column as a journalist on the Guardian today. And forgive me, but I think it’s a load of old piffle. I think it reached its fevered peak in the passage:
Many areas of science are legitimising religious thought in ways regarded as inconceivable for much of the past century and half. Quantum physicists question our understanding of reality and Hindus respond: "So what’s new?"; neuroscientists formulate understandings of consciousness and Buddhists retort as politely as possible: "We told you so."
Excuse me; one side is exercising the scientific method to explore the universe in a series of carefully tested steps to push back the boundaries of ignorance. The other side is saying don’t bother, the answer’s in our holy book, and if you come up with something that contradicts it, we might just be forced to kill you. And to equate carefully-arrived at theories with folklore takes relativism to an absurd degree.
In need of a metaphorical wash after reading her piece, I took an invigorating shower in Why Truth Matters, a terrific little book by Ophelia Benson and Jeremy Stangroom that frankly puts Bunting’s waffle to shame. As they say:
Some people do prefer to live in a thought-world where priests and mullahs claim to decide what is true. Others prefer to live in a thought-world where ideas about what is true are lenient, flexible, fuzzy around the edges; where it is possible to sort-of-believe, half-believe and half-hope, believe in an as if or storytelling or daydreaming way. Others prefer – genuinely prefer, not merely think they’re supposed to – to try and figure out what really is true, as opposed to what might be, or appears to be, or should be.
Bunting is off to head up the thinktank Demos. No prizes for guessing which group is likely to characterise the output of Demos…
Geoff Coupe's Blog 
Leave a comment