Many people think of the SAT as just another test, and the SAT test score as just another number that can be used to make decisions about college admissions. The truth is that it represents a systems-based philosophy that reflects the transition from high school education to college education.

We all can attest to the power of education to change lives for the better, but we should not be too hasty in thinking that our problem today is a lack of education. If a lack of education were our problem educated people would not start wars; educated people would not embezzle funds, educated people would not pollute the environment. There would be no such thing as an educated crook. Our problem may be that we do not yet know the purpose of education nor the purpose of the scientific activity that often is its foundation. We need to understand why we practice education and science. Without that information we will never know whether we have used them effectively.

The only reason we learn about the world is so we can learn about ourselves, and the only reason we learn about ourselves is so we can remedy whatever we discover is wrong with ourselves. Those who are best equipped to lead us in the effort to remedy what is wrong with us are those who lead us in learning about the world around us. Why, then, is the scientific community missing in action as we battle our most pressing social problems?

The theory of evolution is population based and requires that the population evolve into what is good for the population not for the individual. Why is it that what humans have evolved into is beneficial to some individuals but not to the population?

I am beginning to wonder why white people have to be present when black people are reminding themselves of just how horribly their ancestors were treated by white people in the past. It is painful enough for me. I can just imagine how painful it must be for them to be reminded that the people doing those terrible deeds in those pictures are in their bloodline.

Many people associate Carl Sagan with the idea (not original with him) that humans are made of star stuff, but not many people recall that he also said that humans "embody the local eyes and ears and thoughts and feelings of the cosmos, [and] we ... speak for earth." That is very unfortunate.

Nothing makes sense until you make sense of it.

Fear, Intelligence and Superstition

Fear has the power to eradicate any advantage that intelligence provides over superstition. How else do you explain the reluctance among the scientific community to accept that the growth and development of humanity is not a random process? They accept that the process from conception to death is not random. They accept that the universe follows a set of rules. They agree that the oceans heal themselves. But the moment one suggests that the development of the human race follows a set of instructions, the response is that this is metaphysical or philosophical and outside of the scope of science. The only possible explanation is the fear of being accused of accepting the influence of God. Intelligence has been overcome by superstition.

Scientists hold the key to the future of humanity because they, more than most of the rest of us, understand that the nature of a thing determines its behavior. Scientists need to remind us of what we seem to have forgotten, that humans are also one of those "things" of nature. It is our nature that determines our behavior. Training does not change our nature; it only changes our behavior and only temporarily. If we really want to change our behavior we need to find a way to change our nature. It must be possible to change our nature because we would not feel the need to change our behavior if it were not possible.

Notice that the key is not in what scientists can do but in what they must get us to believe.

Are Most Scientists Really Atheists?

You may have read the articles which claim that most scientists do not believe in the existence of a Supreme Being who is as superior to humans as humans are superior to human creations. This is my restatement of what I think is meant when they say that most scientists are atheists or do not believe in God or the idea of a God. I think that the scientific evidence says otherwise. What I believe is true is that most scientists make the claim that they do not believe in a Supreme Being. How do I know that to be true? I think the evidence is convincing.

If you go through the scientific literature you will find a staggering list of different areas of scientific research. There are scientific and research journals devoted to a wide range of subjects. Everything that humans have ever discovered is the subject of scientific research. Everything, that is, except the most important scientific discovery of all. There is not one single journal that is devoted to the study of anything related to the study of the behavior of the human species. Let us be clear. This does not mean that there are no studies of humans. You will find research on human groups and organizations. You will find studies on the behavior of humans as individuals. But you will not find one study on the behavior of humans as a species. This is true even though it is documented in the literature that this behavior has changed over time. We know about the growth and development of the bodies of human beings than we do about the growth and development of our species. What does that have to do with a belief in God? Let me make the connection.

If scientists refuse to study the human race from a scientific perspective by studying it as a species, it can only be because they are leaving this task up to a superior being. I am not suggesting that the idea is the same as that now held by theists, neither is there any reason to believe that current theistic thinking on the subject is correct. But scientists cannot continue to pretend that an entity called the human race does not exist, which is what the current approach implies, while claiming that theists recognize a God who does not exist. Such a stance is scientifically and intellectually irresponsible.