In this blog post, we examine how the film ‘Contact’ navigates the boundaries between science and religion and depicts the process of understanding each other’s beliefs, through the perspectives of scientist Ellie Arroway and theologian Father Jass.
The protagonist, Dr. Ellie Arroway (played by Jodie Foster), is an astrophysicist searching for extraterrestrial intelligent life. One day, Ellie receives an alien signal from the star Vega and discovers it contains the blueprint for a transport device. After overcoming numerous obstacles, Ellie boards the craft and travels 26 light-years to Vega, where she encounters an alien lifeform resembling her father. However, returning with only vague conversations and dreamlike memories, and no tangible evidence, she faces intense skepticism over her 18-hour experience—a mere blink of an eye on Earth. Ultimately called to testify, Elle struggles to answer the barrage of questions and concedes the validity of the interrogation. Yet, when confronted with the argument that denying the experience outright would have been simpler, she breaks down in tears and pleads. As a human being, she knew those memories were real. She had seen that humans are not alone in the universe, and so she could not deny the experience. Returning to the research facility, Ellie answers a child’s question about whether aliens exist with the film’s iconic line: “If we were the only ones in this vast universe, it would be a tremendous waste of space.”
The above is the plot of the 1997 film ‘Contact’. The film suggests that science and religion share similarities, and can be the same in their pursuit of truth. This is expressed through its two central characters. The protagonist, Ellie, refuses to abandon her determination to explore the existence of extraterrestrials, even as other scientists condemn her research as futile. Meanwhile, her lover, the theologian Jesse, asserts that God exists, though he cannot prove it. These two characters, similar yet different, clash initially but gradually come to respect and understand each other’s beliefs as the film progresses. Ellie and Jesse symbolize the positions of believing in the existence of extraterrestrials and the existence of God, respectively. The film uses these two characters to show that there are commonalities between these two positions.
The message first emerges in a scene where Jas and Ellie, after meeting at a scientists’ party, sneak away to gaze at the night sky together and talk. Ellie says that since childhood, looking at the mysterious universe made her believe there must be intelligent civilizations within it, leading her to believe humans are not alone. Jas also shares his experience: while gazing at the night sky, he felt he was not alone and that God was with him. By showing them starting from the same place and reaching seemingly similar conclusions, the film conveys the similarity between their two positions to the audience. As events unfold, this forgotten theme is further emphasized in the hearing scene. Ellie, who had claimed she didn’t believe in God due to lack of evidence, is now attacked with the exact same questions she used to criticize Jas, a theist, after returning from her encounter with aliens. Yet, she doesn’t refute them; instead, she appears to acknowledge the opponent’s arguments. Here, the audience overlaps the protagonist with Jas, receiving the image that science believing in aliens and religion believing in God may not be so different after all. The film takes this a step further. After the hearing, Jas, driving Ellie home, tells a reporter he believes what Ellie believes. Ellie warmly takes Jas’s hand, showing the reconciliation of two seemingly opposing positions.
This theme holds compelling persuasive power in presenting a positive future for science and religion. However, the film commits one error in this process: it ignores the distinct difference between asserting that God exists and asserting that intelligent life exists somewhere in the cosmos. These are fundamentally different positions, independent propositions. The various scenes inserted to emphasize similarity are merely cinematic devices; they do not bridge the essential gap. Therefore, we classify the two positions represented by Dr. Ellie Arroway and her lover, Father Jace, according to dictionary definitions to clarify their differences. By definition, Ellie’s claim is a ‘hypothesis,’ while Jace’s is a philosophical ‘view.’
The protagonist, Ellie, represents the scholarly opinion on the existence of extraterrestrials. Scholars like Ellie argue that, considering the vast size and age of the universe, intelligent life must exist beyond Earth. This aligns with the dictionary definition of a ‘hypothesis’. The definition of a hypothesis is “a theory that predicts the cause or regularity of an object or phenomenon, established through logical inference based on scientific data, but difficult to prove or verify under real-world conditions.” If the claim about extraterrestrials satisfies these conditions, it can be considered a hypothesis. The basis starts with the fact that there are an immense number of stars in the universe. Our Milky Way alone contains a spherical cluster of stars at its center, spanning 16,000 light-years in diameter, with hundreds of billions of stars within it. Adding the planets orbiting these stars significantly increases the number of celestial bodies. The scientific community currently estimates that about 10 stars capable of hosting habitable planets are born each year, and the probability of a star having planets is calculated to be about 0.1. Furthermore, given the conditions for habitable planets and moons to form within a star system, the probability of actual life emerging is nearly 100%, as seen in the case of Earth. Therefore, the conclusion is drawn that the probability of life existing beyond Earth is very high. The possibility of intelligent life emerging is calculated using the Drake Equation. This equation, devised by Dr. Frank Drake to estimate the number of intelligent civilizations in the galaxy using various variables, suggests that the number of civilizations in the galaxy could range from about 10,000 to several million. In this process, the assertion regarding intelligent life is based on probabilistic calculations, and it can be seen that logical inference is used to predict phenomena regarding regularity. Therefore, this assertion is a ‘hypothesis’.
Father Jas represents theism. Among various religions, Christians like Father Jas assert the existence of a transcendent being with power, namely God. While it appears similar to the previous case in dealing with a transcendent being and lacking direct evidence, theism is not a ‘hypothesis’ based on scientific data but a ‘view’ derived from argumentation. Several grounds demonstrate this. First, dictionaries classify the term as an opinion. Wikipedia defines theism as “Theism, in the broadest sense, is the belief that at least one deity exists.” Furthermore, the Encyclopædia Britannica defines it as “the view that all finite things or limited entities, while possessing sufficient power in themselves, are in some way subordinate to and distinct from a supreme or ultimate being (which may be referred to as a person).” Many people contributed to their creation, and both of these widely used encyclopedias classify theism as a belief, not a theory or hypothesis. Secondly, theism does not meet the definition of a hypothesis. Like the case of extraterrestrials, it is impossible to calculate probabilities, and there is no scientific theory or evidence that can be presented. Therefore, while logical reasoning is possible, the lack of foundational scientific data means it does not meet the definition of a hypothesis. For this reason, theists focus on proving their claims through arguments rather than presenting scientific theories. Consequently, various arguments have emerged, broadly classified into cosmological, teleological, ontological, and moral proofs. However, most scholars today agree that none of these proofs strictly prove the existence of God and that they are based on premises that are highly susceptible to refutation. Without foundational data and starting from premises that include room for counterarguments, the outcome of such an argument cannot be considered a hypothesis. Therefore, theism is not a hypothesis but a ‘view,’ a proposition fundamentally different from the ‘hypothesis’ of extraterrestrial existence presented earlier.
This article does not refute the film’s claim. The author also agrees that science and religion can converge in their pursuit of truth and believes that through this convergence, these historically antagonistic domains can harmonize and contribute to human progress. However, it points out that the evidence supporting the claim is flawed. Insisting on the identity of ‘hypothesis’ and ‘view’ merely because they appear similar on the surface, despite their essential differences, is akin to claiming that mangoes and melons are the same fruit because their color and shape are similar. Evidence containing errors leaves room for refutation, failing to firmly support the claim and consequently undermining its persuasiveness. While I deeply resonate with the film’s message and admire its excellence, I regret that more logical evidence could have solidified the argument. Of course, film is a medium for freely expressing ideas and can be viewed as mere entertainment, a disposable commodity. However, the theme of ‘Contact’ is too profound to be dismissed so lightly. Had it chosen its subject matter more carefully and built on more thorough foundations, I believe it could have become a masterpiece that would have made a significant mark in film history.
