Brown bridging science and faith

Ever since the beginning of this class, a lot of the discussions have prompted me to think about Dan Brown's new book, The Lost Symbol. Granted, it's fiction, and I'm not about to say that anything written in it is fact, but I still think it's relevant, especially given his extreme popularity, which I would like to think is because our nation,and even world, is fascinated with his choice of topics.

Brown received a lot of criticism for his last two books/the movies made from them because they seemed to bash religion quite a bit. Angels and Demons is all about the conflict that many people feel between relgion and science; this idea that the two philosohpies are not not capable of existing in the same domain because one is based on faith (or to a Cartesian, irrationality and fear), and one is based on fact (reason and logic). Which is which is fairly obvious. Arguably, in his first two novels, science won the debate, since the protagonist was firmly on the side of logic, and in his second book the face of Christianity is a fraud. Brown even comes at the book assuming his readers will be Cartesians, as Langdon definitely is. He's skeptical of everything the religious characters do, and is often written to say that he wants to have some kind of faith, but finds his mind getting in the way.

The Lost Symbol, however, takes a new approach. Langdon is still highly skeptical, like his readers most likely are, but Brown I think tries to meld the two worlds a little more sympathetically. Whether it's because Brown was sick of the controversy or because he genuinely intended to broach the subject eventually, the new book tries to bridge the gap, asserting that religion, or faith at the very least, does not and even should not be separate from science. He brings up noetic science and IONS (Institute of Noetic Science) which actually does exist. If you go to their website, it states that their mission is "advancing the science of consciousness and human experience to serve individual and collective transformation." They also state that they are not a spiritual organization, but their goal is to explore the power of the human mind, including the power of belief. Brown takes this and makes the center of his novel the idea that science and knowledge can progress even further if they look at the religoius and philosophical ideas of the past, and take the core thoughts of faith, not necessarily what religion has become, into their research.

The book explores a pretty famous secret society, the Freemasons. Brown is obviously a fan of getting into conspiracy theories, hidden secrets, and secret societies, so, again, what's in the book has to be taken as a work of fiction. But he asserts that America was founded by Freemasons, and while most people would argue that our country is based on Christianity and religious morals, Brown tries to say that the religion has simply been misunderstood over the years. The Freemasons in the book believe that the human mind is indeed capable of surpassing the human body and ascending to become Godlike.

So essentially, Brown is trying to put religion and science back on the same page. Both, he would argue, believe that there is something separate between our consciousness and our bodies, one believes that that essence is our soul, and one that it is our mind. Brown asserts, through noetic science logic, that it is in fact our mind and soul are one, and, through a devotion to reason, we can reach the level of Gods. I'm not saying I agree with any of this, but I think it's interesting to see Brown tackling the fascination that so many people have with trying to reconcile such seemingly oppossing views: faith and logic.