How To Be An Agnostic
of thought onto the world in order to see the world. We cannot
do otherwise, for without our own concepts of things we would
not be able to understand anything. As the philosopher Hilary
Putnam puts it: ‘Scientifi c theories are not simply dictated to us
by the facts.’ The wave/particle duality of light is again a case in
point. When viewed using one set of theoretical spectacles, light
looks like a wave. When using another, it looks like particles. But
what light is in itself is another question entirely. More gener-
ally, quantum physics shows that science doesn’t actually know
the cosmos as it is; that lies behind what the physicist Bernard
d’Espagnat has called a ‘veiled reality’. Instead, there are various
models that a scientist can use to describe what’s observed –
what philosophers call equivalent descriptions. All in all, be it by
paradigm shifts or discarding falsifi ed theories, it might be said
that science evolves by rejecting ideas when shown wrong and
by taking as much account as possible of the interaction between
these theories and the human conventions within which they
arose. This produces tremendous technologies and astonishing
insights. But it can never be absolutely right.
A veiled reality
So what model of science’s relationship to spirituality is right?
Personally, I don’t think Stephen Jay Gould’s formula of non-
overlapping magisteria adds up, as science so readily inspires
religious wonder. Further, there is quite a debate at the moment
about whether materialist models of reality or idealist phi-
losophies work best. Biologists tend to opt for the material-
ist, although they run into the conundrum of consciousness.
Physicists are more open to idealist possibilities, not only because
of Platonic inclinations, or an awareness of the role that ‘observ-
ers’ and measurement might play in quantum mechanics, but
because information seems as good a possibility for the funda-
mental stuff out of which everything is made as any material
stuff. So, as Polkinghorne concludes, while there’s got to be a dia-
logue between science and religion, you’ve got to be careful.