Iturrioz and Hurtado: Trees of Life, Science and Belief

Iturrioz and Hurtado — Trees of Life and Science

But these words are ambiguous. They could also be taken as a fable. Iturrioz may mean that science is not good, and that, to know life, science is more a hindrance than a help: life can only be known by eating from your own tree, never from the tree next door. Because, no matter how close they are, they will never know whether the other's branches bear fruit. This is how Iturrioz can urge you to know life openly: do not wait for science to advance to know life empirically; do not rush to current scientific or metaphysical truths, because in the end the only truth is what you believe and are afraid to begin to create.

Hurtado says that anything that cannot yet be tested empirically lacks goodness. All forests constituted by new philosophical or metaphysical theories, new systems of government, and new options to choose from — all this is, in Hurtado's eyes, more an impossible wasteland than fertile cultivation; exploration is a waste of time because, from his point of view, there is nothing interesting in them. Iturrioz would comb the desert and maybe find something; Hurtado would not venture into it.

Iturrioz says there are ideas that have not yet been proven but are still useful; Hurtado does not like this term at all, saying it could lead to enshrining all prejudices. Iturrioz also warns about science, which can lead to fanaticism. Iturrioz believes in science, but he believes in a science compatible with life and therefore compatible with the ignorance that life brings. Do not believe that reason must be the sole key to happiness, because if so, life would be gray and languish until inevitable death. In contrast, Andrew firmly believes the opposite: he believes that, to achieve a truly serene life, one should sever the tree that is the fruit of ignorance and favor the measured, reasoned, and accurate tree of knowledge.

What Are the Tree of Science and the Tree of Life?

These concepts come to light in a dialogue between Iturrioz and Hurtado. They were talking about the purpose and importance of science to humankind. According to Hurtado, science is basic to human evolution, but Iturrioz instead asserts that scientific truth can be bad for life. Then, life is worse the more you know. This, a priori absurd from the modern attitude, is quickly reaffirmed by his conversation partner as if it were a logical truth.

A more appropriate understanding is less desire, says Hurtado. That's when the passage of the trees appears. Iturrioz says that the Genesis account states that in heaven there were two trees: the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. He explains that God told Adam he could eat of all fruits, but to be careful with the tree of knowledge, since the day you eat of that fruit you will die.

Iturrioz adds that what really happens with the tree of knowledge is that, if you test one of its fruits, it causes in the person a desire to improve that eventually may bring about their own destruction. With these words he sentences all of science.

Positions of Hurtado and Iturrioz

• Hurtado: Values empirically tested knowledge; distrusts unproven ideas and sees speculative forests as wastelands that may enshrine prejudice and lead to fanaticism.
• Iturrioz: Defends a science that coexists with life and ignorance, urges experiential knowledge from one's own "tree," and believes some unproven ideas can still be useful.

For further reference, see the notion of the tree of science and the tree of life as discussed in this dialogue between Iturrioz and Hurtado.