You’ve probably heard the saying: “When you assume . . . you make a sum of As and e.” For you non-chemists, that would be arsenic plus one electron making an arsenic ion with a charge of negative one. That’s not a very stable ion, so it’s not really found in nature, thus the saying makes it clear that assuming is pretty unstable grounds for anyone to base life choices on.
You’re telling me you heard a different version of that saying? Oh well, you get the point. Except that’s not my point.
Everybody assumes. Assumptions underlie all our strongest convictions. No one is exempt. In fact, much of our war of words–the battle some wage between science and religion, between liberal and conservative, between literal believer and symbolic believer, between whole-hearted supporter and loving critic of the Brethren–is an often unrecognized war of assumptions. I want to frame for you, hopefully in a new way, different assumptions we make about the universe and about God. Many of the assumptions about the universe are currently discussed by working cosmologists. Many of the assumptions about God have been discussed for millennia. Most of the assumptions I favor are shaped by Joseph Smith and Mormonism. Some of the assumptions might be testable, soon, and others never will be directly testable. Why might you care about these assumptions? From certain assumptions, Science can disprove God. From other assumptions, Science can’t teach you anything about God and Faith. From still others, Science reveals God, or at least aspects of God, to us. Do you want Science and God to be at war? Do you want Science and God to be separate realms of understanding? Do you want Science to prove or disprove God’s existence? Do you want Science to reveal God’s glory? Do you want Science to assist religion in teaching you to become gods? Do you simply want to know what’s true, or what’s good? What science does for (or to) religion depends implicitly on assumptions each of us makes about Science and about God.
In the following posts I’m not going to argue much for or against a particular set of assumptions, and I’ll only give hints of the consequences of making certain assumptions, or of prioritizing certain assumptions over others. I am going to lay out, as best I can, some of the unproven, and in many cases unprovable, assumptions that we can and must make about the nature of existence. Which assumptions you choose affect such things as your belief in God, your willingness to learn new things, and your prioritization of ethical choices–like how you balance the giving of your time and resources to temple and missionary work or helping the poor. We all make these assumptions, even if we don’t recognize or acknowledge them. They shape and are shaped by both our thoughts and our feelings. So take a walk with me through a tangle of assumptions and see if you can’t figure out just what you take for granted about reality.
The Outline
I’m going to summarize my next three posts right here. Part 1 will appear over the next two days. Parts 2 and 3 will follow in a month. If I’ve piqued your curiosity, come back tomorrow for a second helping.
- Assumptions about the Universe
- Universe or Multiverse?
- Finite or Infinite?
- Flat or Curved
- Finite numbers of forces and subatomic particles, or not
- Big and Small (and Infinite) Infinities
- Variation among universes
- Something between/surrounding universes, or not
- Assumptions about Evidence
- Only objective, only subjective, or a mix
- What mix is acceptable/admissible
- Assumptions about God
- Limited or unlimited knowledge, power, or presence
- What is the nature of the limitations
- Assumptions about God’s purposes
- Assumptions about the best ways to achieve those purposes
- One God or family of Gods
- Nature of God’s family
- Human interaction with God
- How involved is God, and how is God involved
- Limited or unlimited knowledge, power, or presence
- Conclusions: We all make assumptions, whether we identify them explicitly or not. Those assumptions bear on such important matters as our belief in God, how we react to new learning, how we feel about good and evil in the world, and how and where we devote our time and resources. For me, it’s worth taking the time to explore and evaluate these assumptions consciously, and you are invited to join me or observe my exploration.
Well, my interest is peeked!!
It’s “piqued.” I’m OCD about spelling…sorry…
Thank you, Onecrazymama. I couldn’t remember and forgot that I needed to look it up.
Woops!! Thanks. My wife has told me over and over again that she should edit everything I write online.
Looking forward to it, Jonathan! I assume it will be good.
“…your prioritization of ethical choices–like how you balance the giving of your time and resources to temple and missionary work or helping the poor.”
Perhaps more interesting would be a discussion of the assumptions underlying statements such as these. I see no need for a “choice” here. In fact, especially long term, I see the former (all spiritual activity in the Chuch, really) as essential to addressing the latter in any meaningful way.
This could be a really interesting discussion. I have been thinking about doing just such a thing later this year. I can address the assumptions that go into this statement quite briefly, though.
You are using choice in a different way than that used in my example. You are saying it is possible to do temple work, missionary work, and help the poor. All I am saying is that when you are in the temple, you aren’t out building a house with Habitat for Humanity. When you are spending your money to support a missionary you aren’t spending that same money to feed the homeless. These are choices with ethical consequences, and thus ones we have to make every day. That is the type of choice assumed by my sentence.
The more complex networks of choices that govern whether being a temple attending, missionary supporting member of the LDS church also results in greater amounts of more effective help for the poor is a worthwhile discussion, I think, but not my immediate purpose. I have to lay out an entire way of thinking before I can get there.
Onecrazymama, relax, Bro. Barker meant his interest is currently maxed out.
I appreciated the spelling correction, since I made it (and corrected it) in the main post, but thank you for the defense of our emotions.
Wow, I love the variety of posts here at Rational Faiths! I read something like this and get so excited to let my mind play with new ideas and perspectives on such big topics as the assumptions we make about the universe and how that is connected the decisions we make in our daily lives. This is my idea of fun! Looking forward to the ride. 🙂
Thanks for your interest, Rachel. I hope it is rewarding.