John Carew Eccles, a neurophysiologist who won the Nobel Prize for Medicine in 1963, was already in decline: the belief “to explain the entire spiritual world in terms of patterns of neural activity (…) should be classified as a myth.” Then another man became involved in science – and medicine – neurosurgeon Eben Alexander, who recounted in a book a few years ago, published by Mondadori in Italy, Millions of Butterflies, his astonishing, if not true, experience of memory persistence and its effects when it should have been prevented from During the fact that the reference organ, the brain, was devoured by Escherichia Coli. The materialist and atheist neurosurgeon once saw and heard things that led him to believe in God, and memory, as the philosopher Bergson was right, is not a monolithic sequence of points at all. Life is something more than a collection of organs, the whole is not just a collection of parts. For machine science, these visions, those experiences, those perturbations in spacetime shouldn’t happen. A science based on calculations corrupted by the humanistic perspective, man also, would have said that the philosopher is an enemy of rationality at all costs. As Pietro Menga, former Enel researcher on the topics of renewable energy and environmental protection, has now emphasized in his book Science vs Faith (Lindau, 239 pages, €24), we can explain the language of the universe by adapting it to ours, by describing what we can perceive from the observed reality. Many have seen in Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle and in general in quantum physics the emergence of chaos, materialism, and absolute relativity, while others, including the writer, have read the counter evidence to bias our view. And the impossibility of saying a final word about the birth and fate of all.
Menga highlights this dimension well with a path, the path of science, which can “only proceed with intuition and attempts” and which can find conformity with calculations, not with what is really outside and within us. Current holistic views of the universe take into account an interconnected dimension, in which the smallest being unites in a “cosmic symbiosis” with the existing as a whole. Rediscovering the religions and visions of creation in the West, such as Taoism, Zen, and Buddhism, or repeating syncretistic interpretations, reassessing the character of Christ in his return to natural simplicity, rediscovering primitivism—the ecology of St. It caused public misunderstanding, but it also caused a new path of quest for spirituality against materialism increasingly aimed at consumption.
It is no coincidence that Minga hopes to return, beginning with the churches, to “the Franciscan wonder of creation that we must feel in us at every moment.” This book respects both the field of scientific inquiry, as long as it does not consider itself to be omniscient, and the field of faith, as long as it does not attempt to teach only through dogmas and refute the course of science. With the final “choice” we leave it to the reader’s curiosity.
“Infuriatingly humble social media buff. Twitter advocate. Writer. Internet nerd.”
