I just ran across an interview by Caroline Casey, visionary activist astrologer, with The Washington Post. She has got to be one of the most articulate people on the planet, and I identify with her efforts to communicate a mystical sensibility in the context of secular science. She drops finely honed gems of wisdom like, I don’t know, a diamond thief on the run. A couple of amazing excerpts from the above interview:
About being asked to give a blessing at a prominent international water conference:
“At the heart of all great cultures is the heroic task of restoring the waters of life.”
“The divine wants to be liberated from past confines of human imagination.”
On religion and science:
“Once they said there’s meaning in patterns, the argument is over between physics and metaphysics and the idea is that then they could have a child, reverent science, as though life mattered.”
On the Why page of this blog, I pose the question, “What if women had been serious players in religion, science and other truth-seeking endeavors from the beginning? What else would we know?”
In yesterday’s Science Times, John Tierney’s article, “A New Frontier for Title IX: Science,” provided a partial answer:
“… two psychologists at Vanderbilt University, David Lubinski and Camilla Persson Benbow, who have been tracking more than 5,000 mathematically gifted students for 35 years … found that starting at age 12, the girls tended to be better rounded than the boys: they had relatively strong verbal skills in addition to math, and they showed more interest in “organic” subjects involving people and other living things. Despite their mathematical prowess, they were less likely than boys to go into physics or engineering.”
Alrighty then. Need to think about that. I do know that sometimes working full-spectrum is scarier than holing up in a discipline. And the whole idea of “discipline” is that it focuses energy, molds a soul into an effective form. Hmmm. The challenge is in emerging from a disciplined practice to be able to part of the life-supporting, life-sustaining network of community, and / or for the community — local, federal, organizational, global — to know what to do with the specialized practitioners.
I liked Natalie Angier’s piece in the Science Times today on The Dance of Evolution.
My view is that art and religion are both ways of calling out our best selves. They say to a group, “More is possible, particularly if you behave well.”
My husband claims that football meets all the tribal, ritualistic needs for which others require religion. And honestly, reading the article, I’m not sure that sports wouldn’t also serve the same functions, only with a more competitive dynamic thrown in.
Of course, there is also a little bit of the “duhh” factor at work, science plodding along, rationalizing what we know via common sense, claiming the seemingly obvious as official knowledge. It’s not exciting, but it’s part of the process. So now, let us applaud babysteps.