The myth of the sorcerer's apprentice is more than ever on the agenda.The media are teeming with articles concerning "robots", the dangers of artificial intelligence, those of medically assisted procreation, without forgetting of course nuclear energy, very little polluting but honest by political ecology.The current doubts about scientific progress refer to an eternal reflection on the relationships between science and conscience.But of course, certain religious sensitivities exploit uncertainty to revive or maintain obscurantism.
Science and Consciousness
Science and Consciousness ont toujours constitué deux lectures de notre univers. Son intelligence conduit inéluctablement l’homme à analyser son environnement et à s’étudier lui-même. Il acquiert ainsi des connaissances qu’il peut utiliser pour agir et pour améliorer son cadre de vie. Le parcours fabuleux des hominidés depuis des millions d’années ne laisse aucun doute à ce sujet : l’intelligence est une dynamique qui pousse l’être humain à comprendre et à exploiter l’univers qui l’entoure. Tant qu’il y aura des hommes, ce phénomène ne s’arrêtera pas car il est consubstantiel de l’humain. Vouloir arrêter le progrès scientifique, d’une manière générale le progrès de la connaissance, est donc attentatoire à l’essence même de l’humanité.
However, the language of consciousness has always aroused doubts in humans. Consciousness has long taken the form of religions developing dogmas. Thus, for the education of Gargantua, Rabelais wanted a balance between knowledge and belief in certain values. He said that "science without conscience is only ruin of the soul. Consciousness was then essentially based on the definition of good and evil by the Christian religion. Up to a recent era, it was religions that have delimited the possible in the field of research. The political domination of a religion constituted a brake on the progress of science when religious dogma was called into question by reason. The Middle Ages in the West thus represents a period of approximately a millennium during which the Christian religion has an undisputed ethical supremacy. Scientific progress is then very weak and it was not until the Renaissance, from the 15th century, that rationality is gradually freed from the shackles of religious dogma. It will take several centuries to get there.
The diversion of consciousness by fundamentalism
Islamic fundamentalism and its terrorist drifts are today the most visible phenomenon of religious resistance to reason.The Arab world, Afghanistan, Bangladesh are completely politically dominated by Islam, a state religion.Civil law remains of religious inspiration, which leads to a status of subordination of women.From this point of view, these societies appear today at the stage of evolution of Europe before the political proclamation and the legal establishment of freedom of conscience.Fundamentalism is only a literal and archaic interpretation of a very old text (the Koran) aimed at prohibiting any evolution towards freedom.
It is obviously paradoxical to note that fundamentalism does not hesitate to use the most contemporary tools created by science and techniques to maintain principles dating from the 7th century (the Prophet Muhammad died in 632). The pseudo Islamic State thus uses the most advanced weapons and means of communication, in particular the Internet and social networks. If we can find a certain coherence between discourse and acts among the Amish of North America, we remain amazed by the capacity for instrumentalization of the religious which the Muslim fundamentalists show. Such behavior can only lead to a conclusion: it is not a question of prevailing principles but simply of maintaining political domination over societies in order to prohibit freedom. In short, the objective is dictatorship and dictatorship always submits the progress of knowledge to the imperatives of power holders.
The limits imposed on fundamentalism research
Christian or Jewish fundamentalisms, if they have not derived towards terrorism, are the same logic: to prevail a dogma and, if necessary, prohibit any evolution in an area.For example, the fierce opposition to medically assisted procreation (PMA) or human cloning comes from fundamental principles of a religious nature.Therapeutic cloning, consisting in "repairing" an organism through organs created from stem cells, arouses less opposition than the reproductive cloning consisting in "duplicating" a human organism.Reproductive cloning experiences have been made on animals (the Dolly sheep for example) but this practice is prohibited in most countries for the human species.Research in this area is actually subject to religious prescriptions.
The ethical cleavage on the subject indeed opposes believers and atheists or agnostics. The former consider that their God is the initial creator and that human intervention on the divine creature can only be limited. Reproductive cloning is unthinkable because there is an ethical limit to never cross. By crossing it we enter an area reserved for the divinity. For an unwelcome, pragmatism prevails: it is impossible to imagine what human knowledge will be in the long term future and, if it is necessary to advance with caution, there is no reason to fix a border beyond which man has no city right. Humanity has never submitted to religious dogmas when they hampered its evolution. Human societies have never accepted only a fairly simplistic axiomatic religious prevents them from continuing their way. The same goes for bioethics: the accumulated experience will make it possible to discern the future possible.
A chosen fate?
Beyond individual freedom, today appears a collective freedom of humanity.The capacities affected by science and techniques make it possible to imagine a future of humanity totally distinct from Darwinian evolutionism which led us where we are.The determinism of the evolution of species could be replaced by collective choices.The fate chosen would replace the fate suffered.Fundamental questions already arise.Should we develop artificial intelligence?Can we change the human genome?Should the mode of reproduction of the human species remain indefinitely that of mammals or evolve towards something else?Is extra-uterine gestation our future?Will the sexualization of the human species continue?These are only a few examples of the multiple questions appearing today due to the speed of scientific progress.
Is there a hierarchy between science and conscience?
The trend of current societies is almost always to place consciousness above science.Consciousness remains largely in the grip of ancient religious precepts even in the most advanced countries.The political factor plays a decisive role in this regard.Public opinion is sensitive to religious metarécits because their simplicity makes them accessible to all.The remanence of the religious in opinion therefore plays an important role Edemocracy because the election leads to any politician to play the greatest account of the state of opinion.In dictatorships, the question is quickly resolved since it is above all a question of imposing a domination: religion or ideology then allow it to be justified.
The establishment of ethics committees representing all sensitivities is significant progress in democracies. In France, the National Consultative Committee of Ethics (CCNE) “has the mission of giving opinions on ethical problems and social issues raised by the progress of knowledge in the fields of biology, medicine and health ”(law of August 6, 2004). Insofar as many scientists participate in this committee, alongside philosophers, jurists, etc., we leave the traditional supremacy granted to religion in the field of consciousness. In reality, the opinions of such committees constitute a pragmatic reflection allowing to discern the desirable among the immense possibilities open by the progress of knowledge. Human freedom is then preserved, it is no longer subject to a so-called divine will created from scratch by some dominating humans. There is no longer a very clear hierarchy between a dogmatic consciousness and a subject science, but a dialogue, a permanent questioning leading to evolutionary solutions according to the achievements of research.
Conclusion
If the ethics committees remain advisory organizations, they are nonetheless the embryo of a major evolution of human consciousness.Historically dominated by intangible religious dogmas, it begins to evolve towards an overcoming of the religious which supposes pragmatism, dialogue, tolerance.Science is no longer in struggle with consciousness but becomes a source of proposals allowing man to take charge of his destiny.Traditional obscurantism slowly retreats and our collective freedom to build the future is gradually appearing.
