In every piece of knowledge, those three dimensions of cognition must be organically interconnected so that one does not miss or distort another by trespassing on their competences. One cannot replace or supersede either of the other two. Exceeding the competences of any domain results in deformation of the whole. For instance, the existence of a new empirical phenomenon cannot be reasonably refuted by rational-theoretical argumentation alone (as clerics did when they refused to look into Galileo’s telescope, forasmuch as Aristotle’s writings did not allow for anything new to appear in the sky). Nor one can argue against inner perceptions, which represent direct experience. On the other hand, by neglecting any of the three dimensions ambiguities arise that open the way to arbitrariness. Reason is able to devise a lot of theoretical frameworks that have no sensory correlates. The same empirical data can be interpreted according to several rational conceptions. And not every conception is noble-minded and consistent with the moral intuitions of one’s conscience. Further, among many religious inspirations and prophecies, too, only some shall pass through the prism of reason and be confirmed by material events. Neither a heap of disordered data, nor an abstract conception, nor an inner perception alone can be called knowledge – they are but fragments of knowledge. Among, say a hundred conceivable rational concepts, only a dozen can be reconciled with measurements, and not more than one or two with our conscience. If scientists pretend a theory comes from sheer data, it implies only that they are unaware of their own intuitive assumptions. Every theory contains metaphysics, and attempts to eliminate the metaphysical dimension usually require faith in some metaphysics of a kind that is implicitly involved in argumentation or in the choice of terms. This can be dealt with only by consciously enteringone’sowndeeppsychical processesand correcting any aberrations. For comparison, the Hubble space telescope has a skewed mirror because of a manufacturing defect; however, by virtue of knowing how exactly the mirror is skewed, we can deduct the ensuing distortion and obtain a true and sharp picture. The most important instrument, the mirror of knowledge for man, is his own soul; in order to cognize without distortion, he would have to overcome all the one-sidedness of his character (to become a saint) or to at least be aware of them. Unfortunately, scientists refuse to do spiritual exercises for moral purification or meditation for the sake of self-knowledge because they regard it as a religious activity that falls beyond the scope of their specialization. Consequently, each one of them creates a theory according to his personal constitution or according to contemporary fashion. All of the theories are scientific, yet they vary as quickly as artistic fashion. Thus, neglect of the religious dimension brings about arbitrariness in science. Inclination to different schools seems to be random and provides free space for the authorities to exercise power. For the same reason, neglect of the scientific dimension causes arbitrariness in religion. There are thousands of sects. There are hunSpirituality Studies 1 (1) Spring 2015 47 (11)
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MzgxMzI=