How can we attract scientifically minded people to scripture?

Answer Podcast

How can we attract scientifically minded people to Krishna consciousness?

One approach is to present spiritual life as a science. Of course, the very definition of science is itself a topic of healthy debate within the scientific community. I have a full seminar on this, but let me briefly outline the key ideas here.

Imagine scriptural knowledge as a circle. Within that circle, we can identify three parts:

1. One sector aligns with modern science.

2. One sector disagrees with it.

3. The largest part transcends it.

Our focus should not be on proving or disproving whether scripture agrees with science. Rather, we should aim to introduce people to the trans-scientific dimension of scripture — truths that lie beyond the scope of empirical investigation.

For example, science cannot validate or invalidate the existence of a spiritual world where a bluish-black cowherd boy wearing a peacock feather is the Supreme Person. That realm is beyond science’s jurisdiction — not unscientific, but trans-scientific.

Sometimes, we might refer to scriptural descriptions that align with science — like the detailed account of fetal development in the womb found in ancient texts — which may seem astonishingly accurate for their time. But that is not our central focus.

The essence of Krishna consciousness lies not in areas where scripture agrees or disagrees with science, but in the truths it offers that science does not and cannot address.

Science, in its mainstream form, follows what’s called methodological naturalism — it seeks natural explanations for natural phenomena. If we accept this as the operating definition of science, then Krishna consciousness is not anti-scientific; it is transcendent of science.

A powerful way to begin outreach is by asking:
Are there questions that science doesn’t address?
Clearly, there are — questions of meaning, purpose, morality, and consciousness.

Einstein put it well:
“Gravity explains how objects fall, not why people fall in love.”
We can discuss the moral and ethical foundations of science, but science cannot provide the foundation for morality and ethics itself. It’s technically amoral — not moral, not immoral, but outside that domain altogether.

So our goal should be to help people see that there exists a whole universe of meaning, untouched by scientific tools, and that is what the scriptures illuminate.

Still, that doesn’t mean our spiritual path is vague or sentimental. If we consider the structure of science — hypothesis, experiment, observation, and conclusion — then bhakti can be seen as a spiritual science. Its truths are repeatable and experiential.

So, how do we proceed?

We need to be strategic, not confrontational. There’s no need to immediately challenge scientific theories like the Big Bang or evolution. These topics rarely affect our own daily practice of bhakti. If they don’t trouble us, why should we make them an issue for newcomers?

In fact, when we unnecessarily criticize science, we might actually create obstacles. A person might never have seen evolution or space research as a problem — until we start attacking them. Then they think, “Oh, to accept Krishna, I have to reject all this?” And that becomes a barrier we ourselves have erected.

Instead, let’s try to remove actual obstacles — not imagined ones.

In my experience, many people approach science functionally. I’ve spoken with devotees who hold PhDs in evolutionary biology. When I asked how they reconcile it with Krishna consciousness, they said, “Science is our profession; Krishna is our purpose.” They keep the two domains distinct.

Our job is not to impose our assumptions about what might be a problem. Instead, let’s focus on attracting people to Krishna. That’s the essence.