From Esotericism to Pseudo-Scientific Pop Culture

Science fiction's most telling symbol, the happy fool who thinks he knows everything because he forms his own entire universe, has been described in E. A. Abbott's Flatland, published in 1884. 

A common view of science espoused by members of the scientific community itself is that it basically constitutes an evidence based method of inquiry. A kind of God of the gaps argument in contrast rests on the belief that there are vast areas of human experience that cannot be explained by conventional science. 

This view grounded in  Plato (especially his dialogue Theaetetos) is of the opinion that knowledge consists of justified true belief rather than factually correct propositions. It since has   been  used  as an argument by early Catholic Church (Thomas Aquinas), where also Esotericism is rooted.

Under such an extreme relativist view however, science became just another belief system, albeit supported by near hegemonic vested interests. Thus Scientistic  and Religious versions of the conflict argument attempt to show however that modern Science is fundamentally mistaken. 

The two worlds approach is most readily apparent in pragmatic claims that scientific truth is something other than spiritual truth: from a spiritual point of view, what matters is that a belief or practice is useful in helping a person to live a good life. And the scientistic version, the one that will be explored in this article series , insists that science and spirituality are two sides of the same coin, and that good scientific arguments exist for accepting e.g., healing or positive thinking. 

Unexplained phenomena, sometimes called Forteana after Charles Fort, an avid collector of anecdotes of the mysterious, haunt the pages of  popular culture and esoteric texts. 

One of the most striking characteristics of  Esotericism and popular culture however   is precisely its use of contemporary science as a source of legitimacy. However, in its role as significant Other, science is subjected to two fundamental processes of reinterpretation. Firstly, Esoteric writers implicitly choose one of several possible understandings of what kind of activity "science", this elusive and abstract entity, might actually be. Secondly, having decided how to understand the essential characteristics of science, the intellectual and ethical import of science is judged against pre-existing normative standards. (1) 

Although the term scientism has a different meaning in everyday language as a somewhat pejorative term for the belief that science can and should be applied to all aspects of life. scientism is thus, in the present context, largely constructed in opposition to "mainstream" science, i.e. science as practiced away from the desks of New Age and popular writers today. 

It should be stressed that scientism need not only be constructed in relation to the natural sciences, History and archaeology are just as frequently invoked. This appears to be a late modern phenomenon, in view of the fact that many other modern religious movements also rest on historical and archaeological arguments, the expeditions to find Noah's ark or traces of the deluge, motivated by Christian apologetic concerns, are cases in point. 

Whether they attack science, comment neutrally on it or attempt to cite it in their favor, Esoteric and popular spokespersons, often implicitly understand "science" to be variously the body of statements, the terminology and/or the technical applications of science. To some extent, these spokespersons support a minority view, according to which science is fundamentally infused with rhetoric and conventions of social practice. 

Science, understood in this way as a body of doctrines, is made to serve two diametrically opposite roles. On the one hand, the Esoteric Tradition, from theosophy to the New Age and present-day popular culture, has expressed a distinctly negative view of conventional science. On the other, selected pieces of scientific discourse have been elevated to the status of legend elements in the construction of a large number of Esoteric doctrines. 

Science is, however, not only used as a significant Other, a basis of legitimacy and source of doctrinal elements. A recurrent theme within the Esoteric Tradition is the tenet that the opposition between religion and science has been, or soon will be, overcome. Traditional religions, it is said, had to be accepted as revealed truth. Only the authority of Scripture or of the church could convince the believer. With the advent of the modern age, religion itself has become amenable to scientific confirmation. This clash between science and  Christian denominations has also resulted in the rise of creationism. (See also the ten-volume set of documents on creationism, edited by Ronald Numbers) 

Mormons resort to a religiously motivated interpretation of archaeological and linguistic data to support their claim that their emic historiography is factually correct. Muslim scholars of various persuasions have attempted to formulate Islamicized science. A number of modern religious movements use science to delimit and define their own views, whether science is predominantly seen as an ally (cf. Transcendental Meditation) or as an enemy (cf. ISKCON). 

Some positions see science as essentially a cultural construct, and "knowledge" as being defined by consensus. Skeptical literature seldom distinguishes between "religious" scientism and other scientistic claims. The next part will thus look at  scientism as it applies specifically to a position within the Modern Esoteric Tradition. 

 

1)  See for example:  From Esotericism to Pseudo-Scientific Pop Culture P.2

 

  For updates click homepage here