> ## Content Index > Fetch the complete content index at: https://www.withrealityinmind.com/llms.txt > Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further. # Can science & religion be friends? - URL: https://www.withrealityinmind.com/recording-can-science-religion-be-friends/ - Published: 2025-07-01T13:08:00.000Z - Updated: 2026-09-21T07:13:22.000Z - Description: Spiritual technology, scientific bias, and the fear of death - Author: Amir Giles - Tags: recording Recording details Date: 1 July 2025 Duration: 2h 1m Free preview Chapters 0:00:00 Introductions from new members 0:12:00 The **fear of death**: past and future perspectives on afterlife vs oblivion 0:27:00 **Terror management** theory & fluid compensation of meaning 0:36:00 **No need for more isms** \- trust innate knowing over ideology 0:41:00 Should **religion win minds**? 1:00:01 Should science and religions merge? 1:06:00 "Statistical significance" and **the corruption of science** 1:12:10 Is **psychology** **a science** or an art? 1:37:00 Technology vs science vs spirituality 1:44:40 What faults can we forgive in our ancestors? This session continues our discussion on [idealism and society](https://www.withrealityinmind.com/recording-education-economy-culture/). We touched on the fear of death, scientific bias and spiritual technologies. ***When everything is mind, should science and religion merge?*** Bernardo says no - these are different ways of knowing, and mixing them will diminish both. Science, an incredible tool for modeling and predicting nature's behaviour, should remain metaphysically agnostic. Let's remember, historically “*it is untrue that materialism is the foundation of science.*” Individual scientists, of course, are inevitably shaped by their world views, and unfortunately, right now science is biased towards materialism. Bernardo used the bias against psychic phenomena as an example. It turns out that **'statistical significance' is an arbitrary threshold**, a measure that will win Nobel prizes in physics whilst discounting the paranormal in psychology. This is because in one case, discovering a pattern is considered a discovery. In another, it is assumed to be random, and randomness can include any pattern. But these are the biases of individual scientists, not science as a method. ### Science is important, but incomplete Personally, I was confused as to why science was limited, if everything anyway is mind, and mind everywhere has patterns. One of our members, Sophia, explained this best: Science cannot aspire to embrace everything because it is only representation, guided by reason. Whenever something is represented there is always something that is left out, that resists representation, you can say it is its essence, Schopenhauer calls it Will. Will + representation are two poles of the same thing, as life and death are two sides of the same coin emptiness and fullness, being and not being. Quantum physics already points to some limits. There is a kind of knowledge that is not representational, it is not a model, it is knowledge by direct experience, or gnosis. You need both reason and intuition, logos and sophia, left and right hemisphere of the brain to get there. As Iain Mcgilchrist says, in the west we are kind of biased for left-brain thinking. Like Anne said as well, science is all about knowledge of the phenomenical. However the ground of the phenomena itself, its "opposite pole" is not appearance. We need to go beyond appearance, which in hinduism is the veil of maya. It is a part of reality, but not the whole story." Do let us know what stands out for you in the comments below, or telegram. Next week we delve into Artificial Intelligence - the session link is available here: [Agentic Artificial Intelligence & the future of humanity“It will look like there is another species on the planet”![](https://storage.ghost.io/c/c5/20/c520bbe6-927b-460d-bf38-d4f48d5dc338/content/images/icon/Heraldry-Icon-transparent-bg-1-14.png)Bernardo Kastrup: With Reality in MindAmir Giles![](https://storage.ghost.io/c/c5/20/c520bbe6-927b-460d-bf38-d4f48d5dc338/content/images/thumbnail/agentic-wrim-2-2.png)](https://www.withrealityinmind.com/8th-july-agentic-artifici-the-future-of-humanity/) I look forward to seeing you then! Amir Speakers ![CTA Image](https://storage.ghost.io/c/c5/20/c520bbe6-927b-460d-bf38-d4f48d5dc338/content/images/2026/09/Bernardo-Kastrup-profile.jpg) Bernardo Kastrup Analytic idealism Bernardo Kastrup is the Executive Director of Essentia Foundation and Founder/CEO at AI systems company Euclyd BV. His work has set off the modern renaissance of metaphysical idealism. He has a Ph.D. in philosophy (ontology, philosophy of mind) and another in computer engineering (reconfigurable computing, artificial intelligence). As a scientist, he has worked for the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN) and the Philips Research Laboratories (where the ‘Casimir Effect’ of Quantum Field Theory was discovered). He has also been creatively active in the high-tech industry for almost 30 years, having founded parallel processor company Silicon Hive (acquired by Intel in 2011) and worked as a technology strategist for the geopolitically significant company ASML. Most recently, he has founded AI company Euclyd BV. Formulated in detail in many academic papers and books, his ideas have been featured in *Scientific American*, the magazine of *The Institute of Art and Ideas*, the *Blog of the American Philosophical Association* and *Big Think*, among others. His most defining book is *Analytic Idealism in a Nutshell: A straightforward summary of the 21st-century’s only plausible metaphysics.* [Explore Bernardo’s work →](https://www.bernardokastrup.com/?ref=withrealityinmind.com)