Do you think, scientists are atheists by definition?
I have a different experience.
And yes, mysticism is also my thing, but I don't see it as odds with science, as I don't make claims about the structure of the world. I simply say, I also did study a bit of physic, before switching to IT, but I did not got the impression, it is remotely solved, nor understood. Go a bit deeper or bigger and it all gets blurry quickly. So plenty of room for all kinds of even more freaky things.
No, I don't think they are all atheists. But I do think they tend to roll their eyes at the sort of mysticism you're describing. The two things are not the same.
Well, and I tend to roll my eyes about arrogance leading to humans repeating the same misstakes again and again.
Because even though I personally tend towards mysticism - as the universe is a pretty big mysterious place to me, this is just curiosity:
"But since we only know so very little when going really small or really big, I do say it is an interesting thought to give room for quark or dark matter based life, or the theoretical organism of a black hole."
I made no claim of anything here. "Just stating, hey things get already pretty wild and unexpected on the border of our understanding. I don't think it is smart ruling anything out yet."
If you roll your eyes to this, so be it.
It is just, that I was a bit interested in the history of science and I know rolling eyes is a tradition of the established ones.
I have a different experience.
And yes, mysticism is also my thing, but I don't see it as odds with science, as I don't make claims about the structure of the world. I simply say, I also did study a bit of physic, before switching to IT, but I did not got the impression, it is remotely solved, nor understood. Go a bit deeper or bigger and it all gets blurry quickly. So plenty of room for all kinds of even more freaky things.
You know the anecdote I shared about Max Planck?