– – – – from “Thank Goodness!” – Daniel C. Dennett, reflecting on events following [heart problems])
One thing in particular struck me when i compared the medical world on which my life depended with the religious institutions I have been studying so intensely in recent years. One of the gentler, more supportive themes to be found in every religion (as far as I know) is the idea that what really matters is what is in your heart: if you have good intentions and are trying to do what (God says) is right, that is all anyone can ask. Not so in medicine! If you are wrong, especially if you should have known better, your good intentions count for almost nothing. And whereas taking a leaf of faith and acting without further scrutiny of one’s options is often celebrated by religions, it is considered a grave sin in medicine. A doctor whose devout faith in his personal revelations about how to treataortic aneurysm led him to engage in untested trials with human patients would be severely reprimanded if not driven out of medicine altogether. There are exceptions, … but they can only exist as rare exceptions to the ideal of the methodical investigator who scrupulously rules out alternative theories before putting his own into practice. Good intentions and inspiration are simply not enough.
In other words, whereas religions may serve a benign purpose by letting many people feel comfortable with the level of morality that they themselves can attain, no religion holds its members to the high standards of moral responsibility that the secular world of science and medicine does! And I’m not just talking about the standards “at the top” — among surgeons and doctors who make life or death decisions every day. I’m talking about the standards of conscientiousness endorsed by the lab technicians and meal preparers, too. This tradition puts its faith in the unlimited application of reason and empirical inquiry, checking and re-checking, and getting in the habit of asking “What if I’m wrong?” Appeals to faith or membership are never tolerated. Imagine the reception a scientist would get if he tried to suggest that others couldn’t replicate his results because they just didn’t share the faith of the people in his lab!