Materialism

Of these three, the atheists are the least intelligent. Arbitrarily, without substantial reasons, they hastily run to the indefensible conclusion that there cannot be anything beyond the endless combinations and permutations of the material energy. Scoffing at all conceptions of spiritual form, spiritual personality and even impersonal spiritual existence, they obstinately maintain that there is nothing beyond the elements of matter. This is because of their material consciousness. Their vision and intellect being dull, all they can see is dull matter. Beyond matter, the spiritual energy certainly exists, but because the atheist absorbs himself in the actions and reactions of matter, he is unable to perceive it. Spiritual energy, however, can be understood by any intelligent person by its symptom-consciousness.

With their limited knowledge, atheists can offer no suitable explanation for the existence of consciousness. They sometimes try to explain that consciousness somehow or other springs spontaneously from a combination of material elements, but their explanation of how this occurs is inadequate.

In ancient times, of course, the doctrine of spontaneous generation, which maintains that a mere combination of material elements can produce living beings, was generally accepted. The ancient Greeks, for example, thought that living beings could be generated from mud and slime under the influence of heat. Even such a great philosopher as Aristotle believed that worms, larvae and fireflies developed from morning dew, decaying slime, mucus and so on, and that eels, crabs, fish, bedbugs, flies, moths, frogs, salamanders and mice originated in the same spontaneous manner. Variations of this thinking continued throughout the Middle Ages and even until modern times. Descartes and Newton accepted the theory of spontaneous generation without qualification, as did the prominent physician William Harvey (the discoverer of blood circulation) and most other leaders of the scientific community. After the invention of the microscope led to the discovery of microorganisms, many European scientists considered the existence of these tiny creatures to be further evidence of spontaneous generation, and it was generally accepted that living entities such as bacteria could be spontaneously produced from material elements until this was completely disproved in 1862 by a brilliant series of experiments performed before the French Academy by Louis Pasteur.

Yet although in modern times we chuckle at the idea that matter could spontaneously give birth to fish, eels, salamanders or bacteria, modern biological science, in a feeble attempt to show the material origin of consciousness, has put forward the theory that living entities such as viruses could be cooked up in nature or in a laboratory by a mixture of amino acids and other such chemicals. From the viewpoint of logic and evidence, of course, such theories are all hazy, insubstantial and unscientific, and from the viewpoint of ordinary common sense they are simply foolish. If living entities can be produced in a laboratory from a combination of elements, why don't the material scientists stop boasting over their theories and produce practical results? Why don't they brew up more scientists on their own level to assist in their research? Or why don't they create even an ant? The fact is, of course, that try as they may to derive life from matter, they cannot create even an ant or a tiny germ.

When challenged with this inability, the foolish scientists heroically answer that they are "on the brink of discovery" or "just on the verge" of being able to create life, but it seems this is their permanent position. They always say, "We're trying," but these are the words of failures. Even the most dismal failure can claim to be "trying," but this is merely euphemistic talk meant to cover his defeat. The correct explanation for this failure is given in Bhagavad-gita: "Consciousness can neither be created nor destroyed." Consciousness is not a material element or compound one can formulate in a laboratory. It is a spiritual element, and its qualities are completely different from those of matter. But because they cannot see it with their puny instruments, materialistic scientists arrogantly persist in denying the existence of the spiritual or conscious element, and yet they boastfully advertise their monopoly on biology-the so-called science of life-although they have no good idea what life is or where it comes from. Such material scientists would make more progress if they studied the scientific explanations of the forms and properties of consciousness put forward in Vedic literatures such as Bhagavad-gita; yet despite the inadequacies and contradictions of their own theories, neither these nor other such atheists have the intelligence and humility to do so. In this way they limit their progress within the finite jurisdiction of the material energy and disqualify themselves from understanding the existence of transcendental form.