Our new “god of the gaps”

This morning I shared a FB post that stated that only better science refutes science—that science is not refuted by feelings, religion, our favorite politician, or half-baked opinions found on YouTube videos. Here’s more on the subject…

There’s an old phrase, “god of the gaps.” It describes how people attribute to a deity anything they cannot otherwise explain or understand. “God” resides in those “gaps” in human knowledge. So, if and when science provides a reasonable and consistent explanation of some previously-mysterious phenomenon, the “god of the gaps” is claimed to reside a little deeper into whatever remains unexplained, into the remaining gap. If and when a reasonable and consistent explanation of that new gap is proposed, then this “god” finds a new place to lodge in the remaining unknown.

During the past couple of centuries, the “god of the gaps” has been relegated to an ever-shrinking place in human understanding. I believe this is one important, though largely-ignored, reason for the decline of many religious institutions that have held science and the scientific method in high regard and as not antithetical to religious faith. We have taught our children to take science seriously, but have not articulated a faith that can co-exist with science.

Now the “god of the gaps” has been supplanted by what might be called “conspiracy in the crevices.” What is not known is like a crevice in which it is tempting to see a conspiracy. Many love conspiracies because they seem to explain things that are not otherwise fully understood and which may never be. 

It would be interesting to know if people who are adherents of religious institutions where suspicion of science is prevalent are more likely than the general population to see a conspiracy when something is not fully explainable. I am not saying they are, just wondering if there is a positive correlation.

Conspiracy theorists used to be on the fringes of modern society, but now they have an advocate in the White House, and evangelists on Facebook and YouTube to spread their news. One great American fantasy is that anyone with an opinion can be regarded as an expert. Carefully researched explanations of events and phenomena can be cavalierly discounted when they don't answer all questions. Someone in authority or just holding a bigger megaphone can suggest a completely different explanation that fills in the blanks, and millions are eager to lap it up.

To me, it’s a mighty dangerous shift in our culture, and a very real threat to our nation’s credibility and leadership in the world.

A recommendation and a couple of my FB policies (fyi)

Heather Cox Richardson’s “Letters from an American” blog is worth checking out if you are looking for a clear, documented, and largely dispassionate analysis of the current president and his regime by a scholar who is deeply troubled by what’s going on in America. I recently began following it, and recommend it to you.

If, on the other hand, you are happy with the ongoing and growing assault on the fundamentals of our republic, you might not like to read her blog. It just might change your mind.

By the way, I work hard to resist any urge to share the many Facebook entries about politics that I get from friends and which which I agree. I try to limit my response to an occasional “like.” While I appreciate my friends' concerns, I know I get more of that sort of thing than I have time to read, even while sheltering-in-place.

Further, for the record and just so you will know, I never, ever “share” or “copy and post as my own” any Facebook post that bets only a few will post it, as in “only a few will say they love Jesus, hate cancer, have wonderful grandchildren, etc.”, even though I love Jesus, hate cancer, and have the most wonderful grandchildren in this whole, wide world.