Science and Religion in Search of Truth
There is no simple dichotomy between the endeavors of Science and Religion. One focuses on the metaphysics of human nature in our surroundings, the other focuses on systematic recording of our empirical surroundings; but it has always been human tendency to notice an antonym in the sake of balance. Society’s view of science has changed drastically over the past five hundred years to be the best means of getting answers. One might have look within themselves and to God for answers in the past, but over time this made way for a place of facts and examples instead of faith in the unknown. While they are not opposites to each other, mysticism (religions) and science can oppose one another.
It is important to understand that they function in different ways not opposite ways, specifically in regards to what is truth. The spiritual essence of Truth in religions is that it is mankind’s given grace to be offered and comes from within; in contrast science takes logical, explainable data as a source for truth.
During the middle ages of western history, much culture and prosperity was lost to ignorance as metaphysical, mystical or spiritual quest was the only answer to life’s problems. Science was heresy, and with it arts and music, literature and free-thought (unless it was specifically dedicated to that of the prevailing faith) as well. In the eyes of many, religion and faith would be the dominant force during the period. Many questioners may have viewed an imbalance in favor of religion and so rather put their faith and energy in other endeavors of truth which later developed as the period of Enlightenment. Science produced culture, health and human rights; as more peoples’ essential needs were met, they took means to explore questions in many fields.
The Industrial Age brought large populations and with it a growth in knowledge as scientists and explorers of the world attempted to solve the intricacies of nature. During the 19th century scientists, artists and writers of the time focused on nature to answer questions that faith could not probe. Detail oriented, people began to record all they saw, and through logic and scientific methods used their empirical observations of the world to understand it.
Photography Comes from Science
Take note how I mention that not only scientist have the capacity for this delving attitude, for science immensely influenced art and contributed to other truth-seeking human endeavors as well. Impressionism is the direct affirmation of the senses, by painting what they sensed, not what they were looking at, it sparked a winding road of ideologies in art, all sparked by the same desire torespond to the data of the physical world in a more subjective fashion. As science grew, so did art. During the late 1800’s photography became a means of recording, developed through new developments and understand in alchemy (chemistry) and optics. With the use of a camera (camera obscura) photography is an experiment in visual perspective.
This influenced both the science world, and art world. By being able to record light, it unlocked a new means for imagery, one that is considered as accurate, but also misunderstood as a reference of truth. Before enlightenment, art was subject to classical-influenced rules of thought. Practically all artwork during the middle ages was in regards to religion across the world. Art was a form of incantation for faith, and it had very real and lasting impressions on people even to this day. New notions that Science brought introduced new subject matter beyond the sacred and sublime to artists.
Photography Meets Art
Subject matter in the field of art expanded along with science, and a new means to create was born. With science revealing so many absurdities and mysteries of the universe, some may find solace in the concrete assertiveness of science and only put faith in fact. Religion, and likewise with art, are forces that explain from within, reflecting on human capabilities, histories and emotions. These factors may exist beyond empirical explanation, and so science may dismiss it as valid explanation.
Science was the first to embrace photography, and in the eyes of some religious fanatics throughout history, viewed photography as a dark art. Backed by religious institutions, art was suppressed to traditional fairs of still-life, landscape and portrait. Photography was embraced by artists and scientists alike, and created new breed of person infatuated with the time-ness of photography.
Photography became a hybridized form of art that adapted empirical data with a metaphysical query. A photograph records time with a visual, but also reflects subject matter that transcends data or truth. Art forms to the culture present, and as culture began to think with science instead of faith, new art forms took comfort in the change. Perhaps this attitude should be encouraged by religions and faith as well, since the scale has tipped the other way.
Finding a Balance
The dichotomy view would suggest equilibrium between religion and science as ideal, in time with nature they balance each other out. However it is clear that in our contemporary case, science has trumped religion as the answer. The table has turned, so to say, and now empirical data explains everything. Commercialism has caught on, harvested the artists and scientists and uses visual coercion and data to satisfy people’s empirical wants and needs. The thing that is forgotten, mankind’s’ metaphysical needs that which religion provided in plenty. Contemporary artist Ann Hamilton put rather bluntly that “the challenge of our time is the challenge of empathy…” (on Indigo Blue, MoMA), something that mysticism has taught since the span of human time, and that which statistical data can strain to represent. What is important to know is that we do not live in an either-or situation, but a multilateral and rich situation where both science and mysticism can bring ever-growing amounts of value to all people. Nonetheless with that comes the responsibility to know and understand the differences so that we do not blindly follow one or the other.