Angels & Demons: A good insight in the Believer-Atheist debate

Well it was really a long wait when I grabbed my hands on the last straw remaining though it should have been the first. I finally read the first book of Dan Brown, after having read all his works. I had always wondered the nexus between Angels & Demons and the Da Vinci Code but then when I was through with it, the connection was pretty obvious. I was told that Angels lays the background for the much illustrated and contagious fiction in Da Vinci Code. Pretty much true but then I have my own reflections on this one.

I find that besides the fiction, which has been added just as the cream on coffee, the perspective is more on the believer versus the atheist. Mr. Langdon (the Harvard name is just to confer the credentials) represents a sound argumentative modern rational man who has all reasons behind all things; why particulars practices came to vogue; what particular elements and spaces represent and depict; what is the source of religion and anti-religious practices and all questions which arise in a questioning mind.

Then on the other hand is the character (Ms. Vetra in Angels, Ms. Sophie in Da Vinci Code) who is a devout, finding it difficult to accept such logical reasons behind such divine practices and beliefs. And Mr. Langdon argue and puts in evidence to show that everything is for a reason, logically connected and if the reason is not too prominent, then some hidden religious motive behind it. He pulls all his cards to show that the Church, as the representative of religion in his book, has always been after and still goes on a long way against those who try to prove that all beings and actions are human and scientifically explainable and there is nothing divine in them. In two-thirds of the plot in Angels Mr. Brown has really depicted just that; how Illumunati as a scientific group was persecuted for maintaining the faiths of the unsure into religious practices.

There is no doubt interesting, in fact fascinating description, interpretation and linking of the various monuments/temples/churches and all most have seen but never bothered to find the link which Mr. Brown shows us but then the entire melodrama is just for selling the book. The heart of it lies addressing a dilemma. This dilemma is again only confined to a limited social group, which is again a practical formation.

• For those who are truly devoted and have committed themselves in the service of the unknown who they call 'God', there is no need for finding answers. According to them all creations in this world are a part and parcel of the bigger game plan by Him, who plays for the benefit and in best interests of those of believe in Him.
• Then there are those who don't believe in something extraordinary, something which you cannot see with mortal eyes. Makes them feel inferior and that too to an unknown, which is not acceptable to them at any term. So they don't look for the answers to the riddle that surrounds the universe, why man, why creation, what lies ahead of this life and all.

The dilemma poses only those fall mid-way, willing to believe but then no able to find the answers which will make them adopt either paths. They do not know who to believe and whom not to.

• Science promises much but then there is no simulation of decision-making in science. No direction offered. No distinction between right and wrong. What Albert Einstein did by making the nuclear bomb may have been good for science but not necessarily good for humanity, and questions like these which science does not answer.
• And the same for religion. Why does one need to sacrifice in order to find HIM? Why does the way to peace pass through so many dogmatic and superstitious practices? Why do we need to believe that man is internally corrupt and in order to enlighten him, strict moral control is essential? Why is everyone not God? and all.

The book goes a long way and poses many similar intriguing questions. Mr. Brown tries to answer them in his attempt to get his novel going but they may not be necessarily the best ones to the questions which he has raised. The conversations between Langdon and Vittoria offer beautifully depicted insights into some of these controversial issues but the answers are really lacking.

In any case the way in which the book ends, I am sure to classify Mr. Brown as one not needing an external guidance to offer answers to his soul. His bias (I say this upon reading all his books till date) towards the scientific analysis of things makes them over-weight the paths to bounded morality which has kept the society the way it is. Right or wrong I am no one to judge, everyone is entitled their beliefs and prejudices. But surely, it has influenced many of those facing the dilemma and given another reason to them to remain bewildered and crumble in the weight of their own indecisiveness.

Science as Intellectual Property (Book Review)

Dorothy Nelkin, Science as Intellectual Property: Who Controls Research?, AAAS Series on Issues in Science and Technology, Macmillan Publishing Company, New York, 1984 [pp. i-ix, 1-130]

This book by Ms. Nelkin, published under the aegis of the 'American Association for the Advancement of Science' is one thought-provocative and eye-opener account of a late sociologist of science which makes interesting observations on the changing directions of scientific research, primarily owing to the increasing governmental interventions and commercial motivations plaguing the hitherto objectively-driven field. In the seven chapters of the Book, she has sought to address various intriguing questions relating to the increasingly being monopolized scientific research; some of them being, who controls research; who determines the flow of scientific knowhow; etc.

Chapter 1 titled 'The Ownership and Control of Scientific Information' raises several questions to begin with; what does government funding mean in terms of public access and investigator control?; does the Freedom of Information Act apply to research that is in progress?; can scientists themselves use their data and ideas in whatever way they choose? etc., which are indeed perplexing and for which there exist several unlinked and diagrammatically opposite solutions. Distinguishing between 'basic research' (one 'concerned primarily with the advancement of knowledge') and 'applied research' (one 'oriented towards the development of new products of commercial or military value') she raises genuine concerns as regards the directions towards which "the research" is heading to. Adding various illustrations (I would just point out one which I think is a routine-matter these days), she brings to fore the concerns affecting research trends; "Questions of ownership and control arise when scientists attempt to disseminate health and safety data in what they believe to be the public's interest and are blocked by agencies or employers seeking to control the research they support."

Chapter 2 titled 'Proprietary Secrets versus Open Communication in Science' starts with an interesting real-life dispute on the ownership of research results on a blood-sample of a leukemia-affected deceased; a tussle between a not-for-profit research group of a University and a pharmaceutical giant. She hints the profit-maximization tendency of corporations as restricting research to those areas which promote commercial gains rather than development of scientific temper and adding to the existing knowledge base of human-kind. She adds a series of other real-life situations which leaves the reader bewildered as to the extent and consistency with which biased and purely-profit-driven inducements have been plaguing the field of scientific research. The approach of the law courts in this regard is also made a subject of critical scrutiny in the Chapter.

Chapter 3 titled 'Public Access Versus Professional Control' brings to fore empirical evidence to the end that even the 'Freedom of Information' enactment has been abused by the failure of the authorities to disclose and grant access to controversial information, which may have been prejudicial to certain political or commercial groups with the net effect being; outcomes of research being given a back-burner treatment. Thus she illustrates that even the ways of means for the public to access information and outcomes of the scientific research has been controlled, if not blocked, by professional agencies with not-so-clean intentions.

Chapter 4 titled 'Rights of Access versus Obligations of Confidentiality' begins with an interesting account of the (1971) circumstances surrounding political scientist Samuel Popkin in relation to his 'research on political forces and social movements in Vietnam and on the American policy in that country' wherein Popkin had to face imprisonment for contempt for inter alia his refusal to disclose the information he had collected during his research, followed by the refusal of the Supreme Court to interfere in the matter. She further goes on to give other accounts wherein researchers have been manipulated or man-handled in the wake of vested interests and their confidentiality rights being breached; another method of influencing scientific research.

Chapter 5 titled 'Whistleblowing Versus Proprietary Rights' is replete with illustrations wherein researchers, who have come to know of abusive practices prevalent in the organizations they were associated to and have tried to expose the same, or have not worked in the sponsored line of the organizational policy, have been shown the way out. She then goes to empirically establish the widespread discouragement to disclosure of prejudicial information, despite the same being scientifically relevant. Another lesson for researchers to act in the line shown and not digress!!!

Chapter 6 titled 'National Security versus Scientific Freedom' is a catalogue of events and incidents wherein scientific reports has been gagged in the name of national security concerns; yet another reason to identify the manner in which scientific research is redirected to selected lines and shunned from restricted areas.

Chapter 7 titled 'Negotiating the Control of Scientific Information', though the final chapter of the book, really puts the final nail in the coffin. She personifies the relationship between science and society as a marriage, a relationship implying 'shared assumptions and mutual trust', which has been breached and modified as a 'negotiated agreement and exchange'. Clearly, she has dealienated the level of intervention which the development of scientific temper faces. Building up the relevance and importance of 'science in a changing society and political context', 'science, sovereignty and secrecy', she concludes, if at all it can be described as conclusion, that the future of independent scientific research may as well be hidden in 'negotiation and accommodation' wherein even though there may be apparently not 'moral justification for limiting the freedom', but the course may as well take such limitations for granted and proceed thereon, acknowledging them as the obstacles but nonetheless moving ahead in its quest for an independent co-existence with other natural and allied sciences.

A worthwhile reading. [ :) ]