The Constant Fire: Beyond the Science vs. Religion Debate

by Adam Frank

Eloquent, urgent, and inspiring, The Constant Fire tackles the acrimonious debate between science and religion, taking us beyond its stagnant parameters into the wider domain of human spiritual experience. From a Neolithic archaeological site in Ireland to modern theories of star formation, Adam Frank traverses a wide terrain, broadening our sights and allowing us to imagine an alternative perspective. Drawing from his experience as a practicing astrophysicist and from the writings of the great scholars of religion, philosophy, and mythology, Frank locates the connective tissue linking science and religion—their commonality as sacred pursuits—and finds their shared aspiration in pursuit of "the True and the Real." Taking us from the burning of Giordano Bruno in 1600 to Einstein and on to today's pressing issues of global warming and resource depletion, The Constant Fire shows us how to move beyond this stale debate into a more profound experience of the world as sacred—a world that embraces science without renouncing human spirituality.

Genres: Science, Philosophy, Religion, Spirituality, Nonfiction

304 pages, Hardcover

First published December 7, 2008

About the author

Adam Frank is a professor of astrophysics at the University of Rochester. He is a co-founder of NPR’s 13.7: Cosmos and Culture blog and an on-air commentator for All Things Considered. He also served as the science consultant for Marvel Studio’s Dr. Strange. He lives in Rochester, New York.

Reviews

[digital · Rating 5 out of 5]

Though it's certainly not what the hardliners on either side of the science vs religion debate want to hear, Adam Frank's thoughtful, wise book on the nature of scientific inquiry and its relationship to myth is a true step forward beyond the exhausted likes of the battle over creationism in schools. Frank acknowledges the need to fight the good fight when it comes to asserting the legitimacy of science over superstition, but he also recognizes that there's more at work in religion than ritual and unsubstantiated claims. He parallels that deeper reality with the underlying motivations for the pursuit of science, and he does so in a way that respects and illuminates both the scientific enterprise and religious mysteries.

To make this perfectly clear: this is not a call to accept the validity of the idea of the supernatural. It is not even a call to agnosticism. This book goes far, far deeper than that. Religion and science, in fact, go far deeper than a debate about the supernatural, and at their heart reflect something about human curiosity and the nature of meaning.

Even if you don't buy the myth stuff, Frank provides a wonderful overview of how many of the premises upon which the debate is framed are misguided; for instance, the science and religion "war" was practically invented wholesale in the 19th century, and the two were, in fact, inseparable for quite a long time (and not due to church dominance, exactly). The so-called "science martyrs" were regarded as religious heretics and political troublemakers, not threats to the church's intellectual sovereignty by Reason. It's described well and with intellectual honesty and I appreciate, especially, the respect that Frank accords his subject matter. He qualified to speak from the scientific angle as a practicing astrophysicist, and he is cautious, careful and honest about his claims; and he respects fields like history, anthropology and comparative mythology enough to have done substantial research into their theories.

That an astrophysicist knows the word "hierophany" and invokes it with respect to his work makes me smile. That alone makes me think reconciliation is possible after all.

[J.S.]

Marking this DNF at page 141, although I did read the Epilogue.

Adam Frank seeks to defuse the acrimony between science and religion by finding common ground in the sense of wonder and awe one can feel about the world around us. That's about it. In doing so, he reduces religion to prehistoric myths that seek to make sense of our existence (as primitive science, in other words). If wonder and awe is the extent of Frank's "religious experience," he can't possibly understand the experiences of someone who believes in a literal God. In fact, he seems to reject outright any literal religious beliefs. How is that supposed to bridge the gap? Wonder and awe is a puny place for common ground.

I can agree with him that I don't want "Creationism" taught in public schools (not an issue here in California, to my knowledge). But I think Frank could have done better by realizing that there are people who embrace both scientific findings and traditional religious beliefs. He could have done better by seeking to understand how those folks view the supposed contradictions.

[Bill Kasakoff · Rating 2 out of 5]

This is a scholarly work on the conflict between religion and science. I found the suggested path for getting beyond the debate lacking substance.

[Tola Bren · Rating 4 out of 5]

Adam Frank tries to recontextualize the debate between science and religion by arguing for less of a focus on results (which characterize Creationists and scientistic hardliner debates about proofs of evolution as an example) and to instead notice the shared sense of wonder at the mysteries of the universe (Frank frequently uses the word "hierophany" to talk about this). To do this, he emphasizes the personal religious experience as the major connection and it's shared aspiration, and how the debates tend to fixate on the institutional.

While this underlying premise is supported by the book and reasonably well supported, it ends up being more of a hope than something which feels at all practical. What I enjoyed most is Frank's talent for telling common stories of science history and shedding very interesting new light on them. He covers Giordano Bruno, Copernicus and Newton to name a few, and in each case reveals their religiosity in ways that show the contrivance of a religion vs science debate. Frank's analysis and reasoning is sound and encouraging coming from a practicing astrophysicist. Overall a worthwhile read, but not exactly a life changer.

[Jeff Koeppen · Rating 3 out of 5]

I heard Adam Frank on the Point of Inquiry podcast and really liked what he had to say so I bought his book. I liked it, but not as much as I thought I would based on his audio interview. The message of the book is basically that we need to get over the science vs. religion debate / fight and realize that both have basis in subjects that we don't understand and are trying to explain. He raises good points and has several neat examples in his book about how ancients used mythology to explain the world. Needless to say, I can't get past the debates and believe that bible literalists need to be fought when they try to influence the world outside their particular religion.

[Joseph Hirsch · Rating 5 out of 5]

The Constant Fire is an attempt not to reconcile science and religion, nor to establish a false equivalency between the two. Instead, its aim is to explore other, less combative modes of interaction between the institutions. It considers instances from the past in which the two realms complimented rather than battled each other. Then, after doing that, it suggests ways for reestablishing this broken link that, once healed, can offer both metaphysical and intellectual succor to both seekers and scientists.
The book is a phenomenal success, mostly because author Adam Frank is knowledgeable enough about both comparative religion and various forms of physics to speak with insight, even authority. The corrective is a long-overdue, rational, lucid, and respectable rebuke to both turgidly literalist intelligent designers, and smugly complacent professional atheists. It’s also likely only to offend members of these two camps—the tweedy pseudoscientists who pretend religion is science on the one hand; and the fedora-tipping, Dawkins and Darwin worshipping pseudointellectuals who mistake their materialist scientism for its own religion. Those twirling their healing crystals or speaking about quantum mechanics as if its multiple worlds theory could be reduced to asserting one’s will with positive mental visualization will also bridle at what Frank has to say about their silliness. He holds no brief for Deepak Chopra, or for the execrable waste of a film What the Bleep Do We Know?
Well-known battles between science and religion—the burning of heretics, the Scopes Monkey trial—are treated but not relitigated at length. Author Adam Frank instead spends more time on the immanent, the transcendent found in religion as an experience rather than an institution, and the same feelings experienced by scientists breaking new ground, making new discoveries. Frank also probes how psychologists, philosophers, and other thinkers before him asked and answered questions similar to the ones he brings up here.
The book is never boring, and is usually fascinating, especially in unearthing new details and rarely examined quotes left behind by scientists and religionists whose legacy and beliefs we only think we know. Some men supposedly excommunicated for heresy were actually left to pursue their alleged blasphemies in peace, until they made themselves nuisances in other, secular and more personal ways. I knew as much about Galileo but was surprised to discover the same about Giordano Bruno. In Frank’s telling, the Italian “martyr to science” comes off merely as practicing a much more intelligent, slightly less smarmy version of the professional atheist act perfected by the likes of comedy lightweight and sham iconoclast Bill Maher.
The portion of the book on religious studies philosopher Mircea Eliade was especially impressive, considering that it condensed decades of work (and tons of written pages) into a finely distilled summary. If only this guy had been my professor while I toiled and wore out my eyes reading countless scholarly papers during my undergrad years!
The prose itself is often sublime, achieving the ring and scansion of poetry at just the moments where the author is contemplating the beauty of the universe. Science—when followed down to the infinite regress of quanta (quarks being as far as we’ve gotten)—elicits the same feelings as religion. Magic, mystery, and complete bafflement. Even futurist-explorer-cum-polymath Arthur C. Clarke said as much with his pithy remark about the congruence about science and magic.
Here is longer (albeit still fairly brief) treatise on the same subject that is clear, beautiful, and informative. Some will reject its contents out of hand simply after reading the title. It’s their loss. Highest recommendation.

[Advika Chesetti · Rating 4 out of 5]

I really enjoyed reading this book. Dr. Frank shows that religion and science are both borne out of people’s sense of wonderment at the space we inhabit and the desire to make sense of the natural order. I wasn’t aware of how many great physicists were also religious in their personal sense and likened science to this divine mystical feeling. This mythos is one way of unifying religion and science. However, it’s just that over the years science has gained a reputation of merely being a tool to understand/interpret the universe, but a lot of scientific endeavors started out to address the mysticism. Science not only has a rational/logical component, but it also has a mystical component which stems from a person’s own experience and feeling of the universe. That being said, Dr. Frank aptly and clearly points out that science is not meant to reaffirm any religious ideologies and vice-versa which is something that people forget and get carried away with.
It is mostly a collection of essays which follows Dr. Frank’s perspective on this science vs. religion debate, but I also like how there are stories and anecdotes and brief explanations of some important physical phenomena.

[Jennifer James · Rating 3 out of 5]

The basic idea behind this book is that science and religion may clash over conclusions and results, but they share a common inspiration in the sense of wonder at the world. This is really a sense of the sacred, not necessarily in the sense of a divinity, but in the sense of awe and mystery. According to the author, we would do well to be aware of this sacredness and sense of shared inspiration as we face the planet's ecological challenges in the coming century.

[AL · Rating 4 out of 5]

How fascinating and how thought provoking. Frank brings up an incredibly detailed argument for the view that science and religion are not locking horns, but instead two ways to look at and examine the world through.

I was absolutely enthralled and glad I picked this up. Wonderful book for anyone in the sciences; you may need some science background to get through some of the chapters but definitely readable for non-science individuals.

[Virginia MD · Rating 2 out of 5]

I heard Adam Frank interviewed on Point of Inquiry. I haven't read far enough yet to review this book.