Page 163 - Darwin's Dilemma: The Soul
P. 163

Harun Yahya (Adnan Oktar)

                     Materialist scientists know that the property that makes hu-
                 man beings human is the soul. Yet for these reasons, they pretend
               not to know. Fred Alan Wolf expresses this truth:

                    Today, you will quickly see by perusing the latest books about the
                    overlap of science, God, and the soul, that most if not all of them at-
                    tempt either to explain away the soul as a material process, missing
                    its essential points (that it is sacred and immortal) and its essential
                    purpose (that it is necessary for consciousness to exist) or never dis-
                    cuss it at all in spite of the promising book titles.  109

                    As can be seen from scientists’ words, science has become a
               concept rooted solely in materialism. Rather than accepting the re-
               vealed facts, everything done in the name of science assumes a
               form adapted to materialism. That being so, today we are dealing
               with a major inconsistency: science rejects the whole of the materi-
               al world that human beings experience with regard to conscious-
               ness, and still ignores it in the name of being so-called scientific.
                    Fred Alan Wolf describes, as a scientist himself, what the sci-
               entific approach should be:
                    My major concern, coming out of the ranks of science, has been my
                    own arrogance. How arrogant I was, to put down other people’s
                    ideas that didn’t agree with my scientific view. When I went around
                    the world and spent time with indigenous peoples and tribes, I real-
                    ized that my arrogance just didn’t fit in. Like the man in the story by
                    H. G. Wells, I thought that in the country of scientifically blind, the
                    one-eyed man would be king. In fact, I was the one who was blind.
                    I was intellectually incapacitated. As long as I held on to my scientif-
                    ic view, I couldn’t see. I thought I saw everything; I didn’t see any-
                    thing. So I had to give up much of what I previously held as real, in
                    order to see what these people saw. And when I was finally able to
                    attain this new vision, it totally changed my view of science. And I
                    began seeing science as a tool—not the be–all and end-all of the uni-
                    verse, but a tool to help us begin to dig deeper into the nature of






                                              161
   158   159   160   161   162   163   164   165   166   167   168