Carmen Estrada, neuroscientist: “Science and God cannot coexist”

For most of her career, physiologist Carmen Estrada (Seville, 74 years old) dedicated herself to scientific research, specializing in the blood supply of the brain and its ability to form new neurons throughout life. “The more we exercise a function, the more neurons are recruited, so we can shape our brain,” she says. After retiring she gave a good twist to her life: she studied and graduated in Greek philology. After publishing a first book about the adventures of his father, José Estrada—a young socialist who was deputy mayor of Seville when the Civil War broke out, who fled from the rebels with the help of a Falangist friend and gave his responses to the fascist Queipo de Llano—; and Odysseicson the role of women in the work of Homer, has just published Eve’s Inheritance (Taurus), a book that covers the history of science, its influence on culture and its current role.

Ask. Many people come to the humanities fleeing the sciences, but almost no one comes to the sciences fleeing the humanities, why?

Answer. Because of an incorrect idea of ​​what science is. I try to convey a more open vision, which does not focus only on mathematics and physics, for which, I believe, you must have a special mind. Science has a much broader scope. It is observing the world and trying to explain it by natural causes. This can be done in many subjects. However, when kids in high school have to choose between science and literature, they are not offered this other side of science. If the majority of people saw that range of possibilities, perhaps they would have a more scientific attitude and would be less fooled by pseudoscience.

Q. Are we more or less gullible than in times past?

R. Human credulity remains the same. What happens is that now we have a tailored bombardment through mobile phones. The information we are providing is used by algorithms, which will send you the content to which they believe you are most vulnerable to convince you to consume, which is ultimately the ultimate goal.

Q. Is there a good side to technology that compensates for this problem?

R. Internet is wonderful. I couldn’t have written this book without him. But what are we giving in return? It would be necessary to have ethical control of the technology. But since the dominant thing is not ethics, but business, we are lost.

Q. You warn against faith in science.

R. It’s a contradiction. Science and faith are antagonistic. But there are people, especially in the business and technological world, who blindly believe in it, as the solution to all our problems, as long as people continue consuming. And then there is the other extreme

Q. Which?

R. The one that some environmentalists maintain. Their message is: if they explain to you that science says so, be suspicious. There are books that go so far as to say that Descartes is to blame for global warming. Because it was in the 17th century when the thought was born that science should be at the service of humans, that we are the owners of the planet. And from there we are already lost. Then they themselves fall into pseudoscience. Don’t buy the drugs, let’s say orthodox, because what the pharmaceutical companies want is to do business, which is true. But buy, instead, this other one that my cousin told me about and that is sold by a herbalist. Distrusting science in general or thinking that it will solve the planet’s problem on its own are two equally blind positions.

Q. Even so, in his book he maintains that science is the only thing that can get us out of the quagmire.

R. Science has to serve the human community. But who represents it? Economic interests are in control, no matter who falls, inequality is increasing. They are such basic contradictions that it would require us to stop and think, but that exercise is not highly valued in our society. Everything goes very fast and you have to say something clever and put it on your mobile. Youth is already growing in that and has no other point of reference. It makes me very worried. I see my grandson very disarmed in today’s world, despite having a family that strives to give him tools, but the outside influence is stronger.

Q. Don’t you believe that everything will be corrected, that the next generation is always the best prepared?

R. No. The current generation of young people will be very prepared, but they are unmotivated, desperate, frustrated. It’s a bad time to be young.

Q. What is Eva’s heritage that you defend?

R. If you read the myth of Eve freely, I have used a direct translation of the Bible from Hebrew that is not so contaminated by the Church, what it says is that, guided by her instinct of curiosity, which is the instinct that initiates science, Eve eats the fruit of knowledge and then passes it on to others to continue. Science is a collaborative and collective task. So Eve represents science, the instinct of curiosity, the acquisition and transmission of knowledge. The misogynistic interpretation that she has dominated until now maintains that the fruit was forbidden, so curiosity only leads to transgression. And hence this whole idea of ​​the guilt of the Judeo-Christian tradition, which has done a lot of damage.

Q. Are Science and God incompatible?

R. Yes, they cannot coexist. There are scientists who say they are believers, but either they are not believers or they are not scientists. A truth that is not demonstrated is not a scientific truth. God may exist as a hypothesis, but a demonstration of his existence has not been nor can ever be made. That is why they are incompatible.

You can follow SUBJECT in Facebook, x and instagramor sign up here to receive our weekly newsletter.

_