Rediscovering the Mystery?

	Book review on Why Us? by James Le Fanu Reviewed by David Lorimer, 2009 published in Network Review No 100
	(order this book from amazon.co.uk)

Earlier in this issue James Le Fanu introduces the argument of this book, that the Human Genome Project and the Decade of the Brain have shown up the limits of science in penetrating the mysteries of our existence and demonstrating the truth of a materialistic outlook on life based on a random evolutionary process. Some scientific reviewers have criticised the book on the grounds that it does not do full justice to the complexities of the research in question, but Le Fanu addresses the interpretation of this evidence as much as the evidence itself. Written as it is in the year celebrating the 200^th anniversary of Darwin's birth, it questions the commonly accepted picture of the human being that emerged from his work and the debates to which it gave rise.

Le Fanu's answer is that the nature of reality is in fact dual: it is composed of a 'non-material realm, epitomised by the thoughts and perceptions of the mind, and an objective material realm of, for example, chairs and tables.' He sees these as corresponding to philosophic views in the first instance and scientific in the second, arguing that the 'philosophic' view could be said to encompass the scientific, in that objectivity is in fact a phenomenon of intersubjectivity. No science can be done other than by conscious human beings. The triumphs of Darwinism have led us to believe that everything in the universe will ultimately be explicable in terms of its material properties. It is exactly this contention that the author challenges in this book, drawing on the respective research fields and their histories. Underlying the tension between science religion in the 19^th century are competing explanatory schemes: science was anxious to get away from metaphysical religious categories involving purpose and to formulate an entirely naturalistic and mechanistic explanation of human life. In doing so, it has arguably overextended itself, by denying the validity of experiences that call into question its materialistic assumptions - as I argue in my reviews of Charley Tart's and Larry Dossey's books below.

Le Fanu spends some time with technical arguments about whether the mechanism underlying microevolution can validly be extrapolated to explain the phenomena of macroevolution. This is a contentious area where critics of natural selection are accused of being closet creationists, as if this were the only black-and-white alternative. However, it is true to say that 'the ascendancy of science in the mid-19^th century left no space for the reality of that inner first-person self or soul, whose non-materiality both falls outside and poses a challenge to its exclusive materialist claims to knowledge.' Nevertheless, many scientists and philosophers have addressed this difficulty, and among the positions popular with spiritually inclined neuroscientists is non-reductive physicalism or dual-aspect monism. They do not deny the importance of subjective experience but they insist that it is fully embedded in the physical world. They acknowledge what Le Fanu calls the dual nature of reality, but do not conclude that subjective experience is nonmaterial; in other words, the acknowledgement of duality does not entail an admission of dualism. Thus they seek to salvage subjective experience within the current materialistic framework.

Towards the end of the book, Le Fanu enumerates what he calls the five mysteries: of subjective awareness, free will, the richness and accessibility of memory, human reason and imagination, and the self. The philosopher Colin McGinn suggests that we will never unravel the bond between mind and brain, and that it will remain the ultimate mystery. It is not enough to maintain an absolute commitment to materialism, as the physiologist Colin Blakemore and the biologist Richard Lewontin express it. In Lewontin's words, it is not that the methods and institutions of science compel us to accept the materialist explanation of the world, 'but, on the contrary we are forced by adherence to materialist causes to create an apparatus of investigation that produces materialist explanations. Moreover, that materialism is absolute.' If this is not the statement of a dogma, then what is? It also makes clear that materialism is acting as a 'value' or presupposition that enables scientists to ignore facts that might indeed indicate the reality of a nonmaterial realm.

It is ironic that the motto of the Enlightenment is expressed by Immanuel Kant as 'Sapere aude' - dare to know. Le Fanu calls for the reinvigoration of science with a renewed interest in and sympathy for religion, although he points out that this new paradigm does not presuppose a Creator. He does not refer directly to the evidence base for parapsychological and spiritual experiences, which would have greatly strengthened his case for the realm of mind being nonmaterial, rather than a dual-aspect physicalism. Scientists like Rupert Sheldrake have dared to know, but they are marginalised by their peers who prefer to remain within the safety of received opinions. Not that there are no controversies and disagreements within evolutionary biology and neuroscience, but most of these take place within a materialistic framework and therefore do not endanger the status quo. We will need good evidence to make a case for a paradigm shift. This book gives a good diagnosis of the underlying biases of thinking within biology and neuroscience, but it could go further in proposing a viable reason for 'restoring humanity to its pedestal.'

(order this book from amazon.co.uk)