Scan barcode
cetian's review
5.0
J.T. Krul and Vince Hernandez created an interesting premise, in the tradition of sci-fi that serves as thought experiment with our current society as a reference. Usually the focus is on strict politics, as we see now in the trend of dystopian literature. Here we have an experiment about the politics of religion. It echoes the struggle (for instance in the U.S.) between the ever more aggressive and militant anti-science christian fundamentalism and the (many times) monolithic defenders of materialistic determinism. These two sides seem to deepen their trenches as times goes by, and to not get any insight from their ideological enemy. As an atheist science enthusiast myself, I do not want to choose sides, not even the only obvious one. And this is because the militant atheism bravelly professed my many seems to ignore any value in theology or the study of religions, and simply describe it as fairy tales or a waste of time. This is a very unscientific position, and a dangerous ortodoxy. Even if we consider that something is a waste of (our own) time, we can still investigate its cultural significance and historical traces. Civilization is comprised of all, the good, the bad, the cycles and the unprecedented. Starting any project of understanding by eliminating what is unpleasant (to us) makes no sense.
Well, that was a bit long. My impulse to diverge was the wish I have that this series does have an insight, is able to make good questions, or simply avoid or maybe play with the duality we now experience. I challenge the meme "I don't have to believe it, it is proven. Belief is for religious freaks" with William James's insight in his "The Will to Believe". We have to believe, for instance, in the idea that water is "H2O". It is a belief. A scientific belief, but a belief nonetheless. We trust scientists when they tell us that water is H2O, we believe them. And the vast majority of us can only believe in it. There is no easy (or hard) way to proove that ourselves. Even if we were able, in our daily lifes, to make an experiment and see the two molecules of hidrogen and one of oxigen, we would still have to prove that hidrogen is hidrogen and oxigen is oxigen. Kim Stanley Robinson has a brilliant nomenclature: he says that science is an ideology. And I also like that idea. We follow (I do) this ideology called science and accept its principles. And it creates a worldview. It is a worldview that includes self-questioning and continuous improvement. But it is one viewpoint. When we deny this, saying that the facts (the laws) are beyond belief, it crumbles in its foundations. And science is made precisely of conflicting ideas, because it is not dogmatic. Just think of physics.
Just a footnote: the book is brilliant, and the art is very immersive. I'm waiting for the next issues.
Well, that was a bit long. My impulse to diverge was the wish I have that this series does have an insight, is able to make good questions, or simply avoid or maybe play with the duality we now experience. I challenge the meme "I don't have to believe it, it is proven. Belief is for religious freaks" with William James's insight in his "The Will to Believe". We have to believe, for instance, in the idea that water is "H2O". It is a belief. A scientific belief, but a belief nonetheless. We trust scientists when they tell us that water is H2O, we believe them. And the vast majority of us can only believe in it. There is no easy (or hard) way to proove that ourselves. Even if we were able, in our daily lifes, to make an experiment and see the two molecules of hidrogen and one of oxigen, we would still have to prove that hidrogen is hidrogen and oxigen is oxigen. Kim Stanley Robinson has a brilliant nomenclature: he says that science is an ideology. And I also like that idea. We follow (I do) this ideology called science and accept its principles. And it creates a worldview. It is a worldview that includes self-questioning and continuous improvement. But it is one viewpoint. When we deny this, saying that the facts (the laws) are beyond belief, it crumbles in its foundations. And science is made precisely of conflicting ideas, because it is not dogmatic. Just think of physics.
Just a footnote: the book is brilliant, and the art is very immersive. I'm waiting for the next issues.
More...