I've been reading some more Ken Wilbur recently (review in a week or so) and it's gotten me to thinking. Many religions have a concept of non-dualism, which - as you may be able to figure out - means two things that are one. They are "not dual". Buddhism has this idea when it talks about the body and the spirit and Taoism represents this idea with the symbol of the Yin-Yang (And Christianity has taken non-dualism to a new extreme with its talk of the "three in one", or the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost). My point is that this concept of two things that are actually the same thing is not so far-fetched as it sounds.

So, it occurred to me that perhaps Science and Religion - which seem to be day and night opposites - may be complementary parts of a larger whole; they may be non-dual. In this case, Religion would be the yin (or the dark, passive, subtle) and Science would be the yang (or the light, active, outgoing). In the West, we seem to think that yang is inherently better than yin, but I think this judgment comes from the same worldview that claims Science is better than Religion, so this isn't too shocking.

Now, I want to make a brief sidebar here and say that the symbol of the yin-yang really needs to be understood for what it means (it means a lot of things to a lot of people, but I will attempt to explain its meaning in my context). Take a look at the symbol again and you'll see first a circle. Now imagine, if you will, that the "teardrop" shapes in the yin-yang are moving in a circle. Do you see each of the colors pushing the other one in a circle? Or do you see that one color is
withdrawing from the other and causing motion by its absence? If you're from the West, you probably initially saw that the two halves are pushing the other. You're not wrong, by the way, you're just half right. It is true that one half pushes the other, but it is equally true that one half "pulls" the other along. Neither perspective is right and neither perspective is wrong. This is the important aspect I would want one to understand. And so I'll give another, perhaps more pertinent example: We all know that Optimism and Pessimism are opposites. We also generally associate Optimism with "positive thinking" or as "hopeful" and Pessimism as "negative thinking" or "doubtful" and we then proceed to assign the label "good" to Optimism and "bad" to Pessimism. My take on this is that Optimism and Pessimism are, in fact, the two halves of the yin-yang. They are two ways of viewing the same thing and neither one is right or wrong (or, more importantly, "good" or "bad"), they are just different perspectives. I can't drive this point home enough. Don't JUDGE each side, just realize that the two sides are DIFFERENT and NECESSARY.

Back to my point, Religion and Science are the yin and the yang. They, too, are not good and bad, they just are. They are different. They are necessary. And most importantly, they are non-dual, which brings me to my point.

I've been thinking that Science and Religion will eventually end up being two ways to describe the same universe. Right now, Science is the stronger of the two, but I think this is more a sign of our times than any inherent quality of Science. As progress in Science slows (which it will eventually) progress in Religion (or call it "spirituality", if you want) will gain ground. Some day we may just find out that the truths Science has found explain what Religion is. And we may also find that Religion will explain why Science is. Then we'll see that the battle between Science and Religion was as silly is saying that left is better than right, or blue is better than red. They are the same, but different. They are parts of a whole. They are non-dual. Anyone who puts all of their faith in one or the other will - at best - be half-right.