Science has contributed innumerable benefits tohuman life on planet Earth.
We should be deeply grateful for the hard work of scientists who dedicate their lives to loyal study of this discipline and the advantages scientific advances grant us.Due to its success, there is often a tendency to think that science can explain everything. Howeverthere are actually many things that science cannot prove. Here are five categories of truth that cannot be proven using the scientific method:
1) Existential Truth:
Science cannot prove that you aren’t merely a brain in a jar being manipulated to think this is all actually happening. (Think of something like in “The Matrix”.) It also cannot prove that the world wasn’t created 5 minutes ago with the appearance of age (and with fake memories in your head, and half-digested food in your stomach, etc). However it’s still rational to believe that our memories are true and that the world is real.
2) Moral Truth:
Science cannot prove that rape isevil. While it is possible to demonstrate, for example, that there are negative physical or psychological effects of rape, there is no scientific test that can prove it is evil. Science can describe how the natural world is, but moral truth carries an “oughtness” (how thingsshouldbe) about it that goes beyond what merelyis.
3) Logical Truth:
Consider the statement “Science is the only way to really know truth.” How could you prove that statement by science?It is actually self-refuting because there is no scientific test you could use to prove that it is true! Science cannot prove logic to be true because itassumesand requires logic in order for it to work.
4) Historical Truth:
Science cannot prove that Barack Obama won the 2008 United States presidential election. There is no scientific test we could perform to prove it. We could have an investigation if we wanted to confirm that he did actually win, but the method for proving historical truths is different from testing scientific truths since historical truths are by nature non-repeatable.
5) Experiential Truth:
Science cannot prove that your spouse loves you. When asked why so-and-so loves you, you may cite precedent (times when their behavior demonstrates their love for you) but this is a particular type of historical truth. There is no scientific test that can confirm a lifetime of experience of knowing a person.
None of this is meant to criticize science!There’s nothing wrong with the scientific methodfor testing the kinds of things it was meant to test. However, it would be a mistake to expect it to be able to test everything. There are more intellectual tools available to us than just science, and as the old saying goes, when all you’ve got is a hammer, everything begins to look like a nail!For the kinds of truth listed above, science is notdeficient in any way; it’s just not the right way to find those particular kinds of truth. To try to do so would be like trying to ascertain whether a banana is tasty by sticking it in your ear and listening to it; it’s simply the wrong method!There is one other kind of truth that cannot be proven or disproven by science.That’s because it is comprised of all of the other kinds of truth mentioned above mixed together:Religious truth.It does have a certain amount of overlap with science, when religion makes explicit claims about scientific fact, and when science makes explicit claims about religion. But the overlap tends to be rather small; in any case, true science and true religion, because they bothaim to describe reality, can never be in conflict. Why then does science often seem so straightforward and uncontroversial, whereas religion can be so difficultand contentious?It may have something to do with a fact hinted at earlier:Religious truth is multifaceted.It is comprised of science, logic, philosophy, history, ethics, and experience, all mixed together. It is, in a sense, a different kind of knowing, not ignorant the other kinds of truths, but requiring that they be studied together carefully.
The above 5 things cannot be proven by science as they say.
Source:wiki, new York times1999 edition
#aksis
0 comments:
Post a Comment