Unlike certain other languages of the world, such as Chinese, speakers of English and related languages do not have one unified model of the world, but have two very different and seemingly incompatible and mutually exclusive models of the world. These models are known as religion and science.
Over the last two to three thousand years, there has been an ongoing and often very violent controversy among followers of religion and followers of science. Which ONE is right? Is nature ruled by the god(s) of religion, or by the laws of science? Is the religious belief in creation right, or is the scientific knowledge of evolution right? People for some reason seem to tend to believe that there can be only ONE right answer and only ONE right way to understand and relate to the world, and that any other answer and any other way must therefore be wrong.
Is this a reasonable way to believe? Although it is natural for people to believe that their truth is THE truth, must it follow that other people's truth must therefore be false. Even though other people believe equally fervently in their truth, must they be somehow less true? Or, is it possible that each person's truth is not THE truth, but is A truth, one of as many equally and individually valid approaches to the truth of nature as there are people in the world.
Millions of people around the world believe very devoutly in their religion. Many people devote their lives to religion. Many people throughout history have willingly given up their lives rather than give up their belief in their religion. Is it possible, and is it reasonable for followers of science to think, that as well-meaning as these millions of people may be, they are fundamentally wrong, misguided, in error, and mistaken? Is it reasonable to think that the deep-seated belief in religion that is a driving force in the lives of these millions of people is nothing more than an accident of upbringing and a mistake?
At the same time, millions of people around the world believe very devoutly in science. Many people devote their lives to science. Is it possible, and is it reasonable for followers of religion to think, that as well-meaning as these millions of people may be, they are fundamentally wrong, misguided, in error, and mistaken? Is it reasonable to think that the deep-seated belief in science that is a driving force in the lives of these millions of people is nothing more than an accident of upbringing and a mistake? Are these people somehow less able to develop a set of morals, and are they somehow necessarily less decent human beings, because they follow a different model of the world?
In this book, it is demonstrated that the millions of people around the world who deep in their hearts recognize and believe in the truth of religion are, fundamentally, NOT mistaken. At the same time, the millions of people around the world who deep in their hearts recognize and believe in the truth of science are, fundamentally, NOT mistaken.
At a fundamental level, it is true that there is one truth, as there is one nature and there is one universe. However, it is not true that only certain people are somehow lucky enough to become acquainted with and to recognize that one truth, and that all beliefs that are held throughout the world that deviate from what these few people recognize to be that one truth are wrong.
The English language does not enable people to relate to the absolute truth of the universe absolutely. The understandings of religion and science both deviate from this absolute truth, and they deviate in a symmetrical manner. Both religion and science are right, at a fundamental level, although both still have much to learn. In other words, both religion and science are right, and yet each is less than 100% absolutely right, as each operates from within a belief system that tends to deny the very existence and the validity of its identical twin.
Science cannot understand religion, and science cannot demonstrate the truth of religion. Many followers of science therefore tend to discount religion and to belittle religion. Religion cannot express itself well using science. Many followers of religion therefore tend to distrust science and to discount science.
Why? Why does this antagonism exist? More importantly, how can followers of science come to recognize the truth of religion? How can followers of religion come to recognize the truth of science? How can speakers of English and related languages come to recognize that religion and science are two sides of the very same coin, and that neither could exist alone in a world where nobody believes in and recognizes the truth of the other?
To our earliest ancestors, science and religion were one and the same. What happened two to three thousand years ago that caused religion and science to separate from each other in the first place? How can our understanding of religion and science now be reunified into one single model of the world, as it is in certain other languages, such that people can clearly recognize the common origin of religion and science and the source and nature of their differences? Why is this reunification both a natural and an inevitable stage in the continuously evolving consciousness of mankind?
This book demonstrates that followers of religion can retain their belief in god and their belief in a creation, and that followers of science can retain their rules of logic and their requirement that facts be demonstrable, and yet each can learn to recognize that the other is a valid, a necessary, and, at its most fundamental level, an identical model of the world.