Science is a metaphysical party pooper.

Post Reply New Topic

I think it's a lot more sophisticated. Do we even know what reality is? This is where science spills over into philosophy.

Hi there - noob on this forum.

Reality is subjective. We all experience reality, except in our own way, with our own foci and filters. We may experience and observe the same phenomenon, yet come up with completely different ideas or understandings of what happened, even if we are otherwise highly compatible individuals.

As an ex-Christian (on my FB for a while, I listed my religious preference as "recovering Catholic"), I feel quite liberated to be a non-believer. One recurring node I keep hearing from the Skeptic's community is that science tends to be non-arrogant, non-presumptuous, but very intelligent. Scientists will be first to explain that they don't know everything.

Science, after all, works upon assumptions built through years of experimentation and observation. If those moments of E & O disprove a major tenet of scientific thought, the old modules are ruthlessly shredded and discarded, and a new mode of thought is created, either quickly or over time.

Science cannot explain everything - however, not because God holds the Big Answers, at least in my opinion. It's because the more science explains, or attempts to explain, the more awareness exists of what is yet unkown and unexplained.

Just my 2 cents.

Science as a process works the way you say it does in theory, but not all scientists are science-like just as not all christians are christ-like I guess! The emphasis in your following quote:



should probably be 'over time' rather than 'quickly'_

Many scientists do make the not-unjustified philosophical claim that they know the basic principles behind everything, i.e. that whatever isn't known must follow a familiar pattern of natural laws based on the transformation of physical energy through space and time. After all,





, so scientists atleast have an excuse to be arrogant and presumptuous, even if reality away from the lab may not always justify that.

My main point on this thread has been that most scientists who deny they have a philosophical POV actually do_ _ _