We finally got around to watching the new Star Trek movie this weekend. It made me think of the difference between science describing the world, and science remaking the world. Our technology has become less about can we, and more about should we. Yet it is my habit to let myself root for the crew of the Star Ship Enterprise and fully enjoy the trilogy of Spock, McCoy and Kirk. I want them to come up with technological solutions for getting out of impossible situations, though they always find a place for single hand to hand combat too. Mostly it’s about outwitting the bad guy though, and I guess that’s the real satisfaction.
Should we seek to colonize the moon, upon which water has recently been discovered? Do we need to make it to Mars? What about space stations? Now that budgets are tight the question is is it economically practical, not even can we or should we. I used to want them to accomplish all these things, I was three when we landed on the moon and I probably caught the bug that way. My son has it too and is pursuing aerospace engineering in school. With cut-backs, he may have a hard time getting a job. But to me, nixing the space program because there’s not enough of a material, economic advantage is worse than the “technology is bad”, tower of babel rationale. Man should want to reach up, and for many, that is what the space program symbolizes.
I wasn’t going to quote On The Incarnation, but here goes anyway,
God knew the limitation of mankind, you see; and though the grace of being made in His Image was sufficient to give them knowledge of the Word and through Him of the Father, as a safeguard against their neglect of this grace, He provided the works of creation also as means by which the maker might be known. Nor was this all. Man’s neglect of the indwelling grace tends ever to increase; and against this further frailty also God made provision by giving them a law, and by sending prophets, men whom they knew. Thus, if they were tardy in looking up to heaven, they might still gain knowledge of their Maker from those close at hand; for men can learn directly about higher things from other men. Three ways thus lay open to them, by which they might obtain the knowledge of God. They could look up into the immensity of heaven, and by pondering the harmony of creation come to know its Ruler, the Word of the Father, Whose all-ruling providence makes known the Father to All. Or, if this was beyond them, they could converse with holy men, and through them learn to know God, the Artificer of all things, the Father of Christ, and to recognize the worship of idols as the negation of the truth and full of all impiety. Or else, in the third place, they could cease from lukewarmness and lead a good life merely by knowing the law. (p. 39,40)
