Moving beyond the two cultures

Paris, 17 May 67

Not that the subject means that much to me, at this point in my life, but:

Basically I think I agree with the old philosopher who denied science and reduced it to an extrapolation of philosophy, and thus refuted the matter of the two cultures.

The physicist, the mathematician, the biologist: they seek existing things in the natural and universal order. The philosopher, the poet, the artist seek solutions that don’t exist in nature. The former can speak of intution, ability, calculation, and patience. The latter, of invention and creation, of substitution. The musician creates, along with the poet and the artist, a consolatory order. Nature proceeds as it must, the Universe is insensible to human thought, does not recognize Humanity, neither its life nor its purpose. The Eternal and the Infinite have no other purposes than those that they determine. Humanity however is born to die, can become eternal and infinite only by organizing the mystification of the Universe and its laws. Yet the scientific knowledge of the Universe and its laws perhaps support humanity’s well-being, but also the diminishment of humanity, the recognition of its profound uselessness.

When we will have explored the Universe in researching our incapacity to dominate and understand it, we ought to return to the Poet and conclude that that which moves the Sun and the other stars (moves them, but does not explain them) is Love. Then our faith will not be liberating anymore, but deductive, validated on accounty of our incapacity to go further. We will believe because it is evident, not because it is absurd.

Ennio Flaiano, Diario degli errori