Will science explain everything?

Kburjr

Kburjr

Joined
Aug 17, 2020
Posts
35,625
Reaction score
40,684
Bookie:
$ 91,200.00
Location
still exiled in Illinois
The belief that science is the only basis for truth is called scientism. But even scientists know there are limits to the scientific method. Science cannot handle certain things like love, justice or ethics.

Does this explain the need for a god? Or is there a 3rd realm of understanding to go along with natural and supernatural?
 
Last edited:
Kburjr said:
The belief that science is the only basis for truth is called scientism. But even scientists know there are limits to the scientific method. Science cannot handle certain things like love, justice or ethics.

Does this explain the need for a god? Or is there a 3rd realm of understanding to go along with natural and supernatural?
Click to expand...

...



yep

it’s called “acceptance” ... the bane of all stupidity






..
 
Kburjr said:
The belief that science is the only basis for truth is called scientism. But even scientists know there are limits to the scientific method. Science cannot handle certain things like love, justice or ethics.

Does this explain the need for a god? Or is there a 3rd realm of understanding to go along with natural and supernatural?
Click to expand...
All those things are subjective, and relative to culture and upbringing. It seems to me these things cant be "explained" to cover all things to all people. Aside from figuring out where we construct them in our brains, or chemical reactions to them. who fucking knows? Not me.
 
I often look at how our understanding of what the physical Universe is has changed so much in my lifetime. I find the need to get a refresher from what science told us the Universe should be 40 years ago to what we know it is now.

And there is so much we don’t know yet, but we will.

Maybe things like love, ethics and justice will be understood in a way that science can explain someday.

That won’t be the challenge. Acceptance from so many with different life experience will be the challenge then.

So....even if they could...maybe science shouldn’t tackle this?
 
I am responding to the OP actual question. Answer is no.

Even when Science has an answer their own side looks for ways to disprove it.
We are always evolving & we are always learning which is always changing science.
So someone true to science could never say yes. Science can explain everything.

Only what is the best Hypothesis to the question.

Only thing I have ever heard act like they have all the answers is religion. Some that feel that strongly seems to act resolute.
 
Schmoopy1000 said:
I am responding to the OP actual question. Answer is no.

Even when Science has an answer their own side looks for ways to disprove it.
We are always evolving & we are always learning which is always changing science.
So someone true to science could never say yes. Science can explain everything.

Only what is the best Hypothesis to the question.

Only thing I have ever heard act like they have all the answers is religion. Some that feel that strongly seems to act resolute.
Click to expand...

You hit what I was looking for. Science is the epitome of scepticism whereas religion aims for certainty.
 
Peter Gozintite said:
All those things are subjective, and relative to culture and upbringing. It seems to me these things cant be "explained" to cover all things to all people. Aside from figuring out where we construct them in our brains, or chemical reactions to them. who fucking knows? Not me.
Click to expand...
Perhaps you have distilled the question. Science is the study of the objective an philosophy the study of the subjective.
 
Kburjr said:
Perhaps you have distilled the question. Science is the study of the objective an philosophy the study of the subjective.
Click to expand...
I was told that philosophy is a walk on the slippery rocks.
 
Kburjr said:
The belief that science is the only basis for truth is called scientism. But even scientists know there are limits to the scientific method. Science cannot handle certain things like love, justice or ethics.

Does this explain the need for a god? Or is there a 3rd realm of understanding to go along with natural and supernatural?
Click to expand...

I love the statement and question. I don't believe there is a limit to scientific method ... currently science cannot explain things like love, justice or ethics. There was a time when scientists did not know about elements (they thought that elements were Earth, air, water and fire). Scientists were unaware of the four forces (Gravity, Electromagnetic, Weak Force and Strong Force), quantum levels, Big Bang Theory, flight by man, and many other things. We are currently confined to the Classical Universe ... what is beyond is much more than we know.

As for God, the reality of God rests in the logic or God's relationship to the Classical Universe. Without God, nothing would be the only thing that exists and no one can explain nothing.
 
Much of my own reply has been discussed, but I hope I provide a slightly different viewpoint.

Science is always looking for truth and constantly tests previous "truths" when new information comes along. This is a never ending process, as our experiences and discoveries add new information that should always be tested against previous norms.

To answer the OP, science can never explain everything. Always looking for new information and if even one bit of information contradicts those previous, then theories change until the next set of data.

Science is always the sceptic looking to challenge current knowledge, while religion has many times discarded new information that contradicts doctrine or adapted to justify the original answer. I consider both pyramids:

Science as the typical pyramid with a wide base of knowledge trying to find the truth at the top, however, it's unfinished, as there is never a single point at the peak with constant challenges and looking for new information.

Religion is an inverted pyramid that has an "answer", but is forced to expand their reach as new information is provided in order to "funnel" it all to the previous answer.

To borrow from calculus, a limit may be defined (1/3 + 1/3 + 1/3 = 1, but 0.3 repeating + 0.3 repeating + 0.3 repeating = 0.9 repeating), but it never technically reaches the conclusion. To me, this is science. We can get to that 0.9 repeating, where most will say it's 1, but there is always still that small chance that we have to keep testing.

Will our minds ever be able to comprehend what happens when science and religion merge? To me, that may be the real question.
 
Cobrabit said:
Much of my own reply has been discussed, but I hope I provide a slightly different viewpoint.

Science is always looking for truth and constantly tests previous "truths" when new information comes along. This is a never ending process, as our experiences and discoveries add new information that should always be tested against previous norms.

To answer the OP, science can never explain everything. Always looking for new information and if even one bit of information contradicts those previous, then theories change until the next set of data.

Science is always the sceptic looking to challenge current knowledge, while religion has many times discarded new information that contradicts doctrine or adapted to justify the original answer. I consider both pyramids:

Science as the typical pyramid with a wide base of knowledge trying to find the truth at the top, however, it's unfinished, as there is never a single point at the peak with constant challenges and looking for new information.

Religion is an inverted pyramid that has an "answer", but is forced to expand their reach as new information is provided in order to "funnel" it all to the previous answer.

To borrow from calculus, a limit may be defined (1/3 + 1/3 + 1/3 = 1, but 0.3 repeating + 0.3 repeating + 0.3 repeating = 0.9 repeating), but it never technically reaches the conclusion. To me, this is science. We can get to that 0.9 repeating, where most will say it's 1, but there is always still that small chance that we have to keep testing.

Will our minds ever be able to comprehend what happens when science and religion merge? To me, that may be the real question.
Click to expand...

This seems to be saying we can never "know" the truth, we can only approximate it. Or that knowing the truth is religion?
 
I'm not sure our science will ever be able to explain everything.

There is too much "behind the veil"...and it could have been designed that way with purpose. Our ability to discern "everything" probably wasn't high on the to-do list.

OMG DID OCCYPANTS JUST ADMIT TO BELIEVING IN GOD?!?!?! :dhd:
 
Kburjr said:
This seems to be saying we can never "know" the truth, we can only approximate it. Or that knowing the truth is religion?
Click to expand...

We're likely unable to "know" the truth anytime in the foreseeable future. We can approximate it through science, but there is not a defining point. Is this where religion comes into the scientific process? We've seen religion incorporate science over the years as knowledge has improved.

This is why I mentioned the merger between religion and science.
 
Clarissa already explained it all
 
What would be the reasoning for science to ever include religion? What are the reasons that religion has begun to include science?

Is it to find "truth" or maintain "power"?

Added with edit:

Is the "truth" worth a change in "belief" that comforts many?

The issue is that no one trully "knows". It's the limitation of the human mind to comprehend our existence and the biggest question of all....WHY?
 
Last edited:
Cobrabit said:
What would be the reasoning for science to ever include religion? What are the reasons that religion has begun to include science? I

Is it to find "truth" or maintain "power"?
Click to expand...
It has been said the science is knowing and religion is believing. Seems that argument has been turned around.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top