When we know that our senses are defective and that Big Pharma can be manipulative, how can we work in or with science without cognitive dissonance
Question: If devotees work in scientific or medical fields, does this lead to cognitive dissonance? As devotees, we often distrust many aspects of materialistic society, and we know that human beings possess four defects, implying that knowledge gained through these defective senses will also be flawed.
Answer: Within Krishna consciousness, there are central, immutable principles and then there are supplementary conceptions, on which a variety of stances and opinions can exist among devotees.
Regarding the specifics of knowledge acquired by human beings with four defects: yes, we do not consider such knowledge to be ultimately authoritative. However, the primary purpose of highlighting these defects is to emphasize that they prevent us from attaining knowledge about ultimate reality. For that, we must turn to scriptural sources.
Yet, while functioning in this world, we also adhere to the principle that the Supreme Lord is perfect, and whatever emanates from Him is also perfect and complete for its intended purpose. Our bodies, senses, and brains are extraordinarily complex and function remarkably to provide us with perception. They are designed to allow us to perceive what is necessary for our survival and interaction in the world.
Consider traditional medicine, such as Ayurveda, a part of the Vedic body of knowledge. Ayurveda developed through rigorous research, experimentation, and application on patients over generations. An Ayurvedic doctor today, when diagnosing a patient by taking their pulse, for example, does not distrust their senses. Not all Ayurvedic doctors are devotees, and even if they were, that wouldn’t necessarily remove their four defects.
Srila Prabhupada himself extensively underwent Ayurvedic treatment and at times even took allopathic (Western) treatment. Furthermore, Prabhupada was professionally involved in pharmaceuticals. If he harbored an absolute distrust of pharmaceutical medicines, why would he engage in such a business? If he believed the pharmaceutical business merely cheated people without genuinely healing them, why would he have been involved?
Whether we examine Prabhupada’s acceptance of treatment, his engagement in business, or indeed, the actions of characters in our epics, it’s clear that no one functions with absolute distrust in their senses during their daily lives. When the Vanaras in the Ramayana searched for Sita, they used their eyes and intelligence. Hanuman in Lanka had no shabda-pramana (scriptural authority) to specifically guide him to Sita’s location; he relied on his senses and intelligence. Similarly, in the Mahabharata, Arjuna used his senses, eyes, and hands to fight in the Kurukshetra war, fulfilling his Dharma. While his life’s purpose was determined by scriptural wisdom, the process by which he fulfilled that purpose in this world was through the effective use of his senses. Thus, an absolute distrust of the senses is certainly not demonstrated by the scriptures or by the lives of their exponents.
Regarding “Big Pharma”: yes, the commercialization of any endeavor on a mega-level can introduce layers of corruption that are difficult to counter in normal situations. However, why should Big Pharma be an exception? Big Tech, in the form of Google, Amazon, Twitter, and Facebook, also operates with similar motivations, yet we don’t cease using them. We use them with due caution. The principle is to use our intelligence to evaluate whether particular knowledge or a particular process is reliable and effective. This same principle applies to Big Pharma. Instead of viewing it as an amorphous, exploitative entity, we can see it as composed of individuals.
Krishna states in Bhagavad-gita 15.15, “I am the source of knowledge, remembrance, and forgetfulness.” Devotee scientists like Sadaputa Dasa (Dr. Richard L. Thompson) have used this verse to explain the divine source of inspiration. Extraordinary breakthroughs in any field often occur not through purely rational, step-by-step reasoning, but through sudden, inspired leaps of insight. These inspired insights can reasonably be argued to come from a source beyond the human. We can thus understand that breakthroughs, even in medicine or any other field, are a result of divine grace—inspiration granted to dedicated individuals working in those areas.
Therefore, while cognitive dissonance is possible, it is by no means an inevitable consequence of devotees working in scientific fields or utilizing the products of science. Overall harmonization can be achieved by understanding that:
- We rely exclusively on scripture for understanding life’s ultimate purpose and the nature of ultimate reality.
- For functioning effectively in this world, we adopt appropriate processes, using our intelligence and discretion, to fulfill our responsibilities, make contributions, and navigate our progress.
The Isopanishad states that we need knowledge of both transcendence and this world. It is the knowledge of this world that helps us navigate it effectively, as Srila Prabhupada explains. We navigate this mortal world by possessing adequate knowledge of how the material world functions, and we attain the eternal world by possessing knowledge of ultimate reality. Thus, as devotees, we utilize whatever knowledge is available to function as effectively as possible. We use technology, including products from Big Pharma, according to the principle of yukta-vairagya: we don’t become attached to them, but we judiciously utilize them for the protection of our bodies. We don’t consider them ultimately definitive, but we do consider them circumstantially useful, valuable, and even essential.
Consider a concluding example: we are communicating in English. Most languages spoken today are not considered “revealed” languages like Sanskrit, and even Sanskrit has evolved significantly. Languages are developed by people with four defects, and we learn them with our own defects. Yet, we use these languages, despite knowing that communication can be inadequate or incorrect due to linguistic ambiguities and fallibilities, even when we are expert and clear in our intentions. Still, we use language with care.
Rather than simply rejecting things in this world because they are products of “four defects,” we can view them positively in multiple ways: as manifestations of the completeness of the Lord’s creation, as manifestations of the intelligence and inspiration bestowed by the Lord, and as essential resources for us to function in this world.
By maintaining a proper balanced understanding, we avoid uncritically rejecting or perpetually suspecting all material knowledge. Some devotees may hold such knowledge in greater suspicion, and some in lesser, depending on their personal study and experience with it. There is room for variability in devotees’ attitudes towards this knowledge, while all devotees agree on and rely upon scriptural knowledge regarding the nature of ultimate reality.