To which extent should we reject material science?

Many think that following the Vedas means automatically having a very critical view of material science, calling all scientists rascals, cheaters, and so on. There are many nuances, however.

Many think that following the Vedas and the teachings of Prabhupada means automatically having a very critical view of material science, calling all scientists rascals, cheaters, and so on. There are many nuances, however.

First of all, there is no evidence that all scientists, as individuals, are cheaters. On the opposite, many are not. There are even many devotees who work in different branches of scientific research. If we generalize and call all scientists cheaters and rascals, we are also offending the ones who are honest. There are indeed many scientists who are rascals and cheaters, as well as many people from other areas. In essence, everyone who doesn't accept Krsna as the Supreme Personality of Godhead is a cheater, because voluntarily or involuntarily, he is speaking untruths. Srila Prabhupada raised this point on quite a few occasions, but when it comes to us, we can't generalize.

A second point is that material science or experimental knowledge is also considered a valid way to obtain knowledge. It's called āroha, or the ascending process. It's a valid process, it's just that it's not the best one. Srila Prabhupada mentions this on the Sri Isopanishad (intro):

"In the beginning the first living creature was Brahmā. He received this Vedic knowledge and imparted it to Nārada and other disciples and sons, and they also distributed it to their disciples. In this way, the Vedic knowledge comes down by disciplic succession. It is also confirmed in the Bhagavad-gītā that Vedic knowledge is understood in this way. If you make experimental endeavor, you come to the same conclusion, but just to save time you should accept."

Vedic knowledge is perfect knowledge; therefore, when experiments are properly done and interpreted, the results are going to support the conclusions of the Vedas. Good science is, therefore, a great ally because it corroborates the knowledge from the Vedas.

As I posted in previous articles, numbers that are offered in modern astronomy for the beginning of the universe, the creation of the solar system, and the Permian–Triassic extinction match almost perfectly the dates given in the Puranas. There are also many other points in the areas of genetics, cosmology, and so on. As science progresses, it's gradually coming to an agreement with the Vedas in more areas, validating and corroborating the validity and authority of the Vedas.

For example, the Vedas recommend ghee as the best type of fat. This is something that used to be strongly dismissed by science. Until about 15 years ago, the consensus was that butter and ghee are dangerous types of fat, and everyone should eat margarine. However, this idea was destroyed by newer studies, which proved that margarine was a poison and butter and ghee are actually healthy all along. We can see that science disagreed with the conclusions of the Vedas for some time, but as it evolved, it came to agree with them. The knowledge of the Vedas was always correct, while the knowledge of modern science had to pass through a long maturation until the right conclusion was reached.

There are also cases in which we misinterpret passages of the Vedas to come to conclusions that are flawed and are later contradicted by modern studies. Some read the descriptions of the Puranas and conclude that the Earth is flat, for example, which is silly. In this case, experimental studies can give us data that may help us to find the correct interpretation of the scriptures. Just as scientists without proper data and understanding can create incorrect theories, neophyte students of the Vedas, without the proper understanding, can also make many mistakes.

The risk of rejecting material science dogmatically is that it takes away a potential system of checks and balances for our practical application of the knowledge of the scriptures. We risk then becoming fanatics, trying to impose incorrect conclusions of the scriptures, just like Christians during the Middle Ages. A healthier approach is to understand, as far as possible, both the process of knowledge in the Vedas, and the methods used in scientific studies, being thus able to point out the defects in scientific theories, when they are flawed, but at the same time be able to accept valid points raised by them. When this is applied at the right measure, it can result in a more refined understanding of the scriptures.

In this way, the knowledge from experimental studies can't be completely dismissed. On the other hand, we should take results that don't agree with conclusions from the Vedas with a grain of salt, since there is a great possibility that they may be incorrect. As Srila Prabhupada explains, our senses and instruments are imperfect, as well as the intelligence we use to convert data into theories; therefore, there is the possibility of mistakes at all steps.

Some completely dismiss all information that comes from science. I think this is quite questionable, especially when blank statements are used. However, there are also those on the other extreme, who blindly believe data and theories, even if they can't fully understand how the data was obtained and how the conclusions were drawn. I believe this is equally condemnable. As in other situations, the right is somewhere in the middle.

Read also:

How the cosmic dates given in the Vedas match modern science (The Intriguing Vedic Universe, ch.14)

Vedas vs Science (The Intriguing Vedic Universe, ch.4)

Srimad Bhagavatam #22: Cosmic time in the Vedas

If you read this article to the end, give it a like. This helps it to reach more people.
If you have questions, use the comments; I will answer as possible. They may even become the topic for another article. Your thoughts and opinions are also very welcome. ⤵️