Limits of Science

India
March 23, 2010 9:24pm CST
Scientific inquiry in limited in its nature. It does not take into account questions of morality or meaning of life and so on. Scientific methodology is based on explaining reality through natural causes and means. It does not employ transcendental agent to explain the causes because such agent is not testable. Since Science deals only with the natural realms it does not affirm God's existence; but it also does not deny God's existence. Do you think Science is limited in its inquiry of reality?
6 responses
@urbandekay (18278)
25 Mar 10
Apart from the ways you mention, science is limited in another way. Imagine a completed science, still the question would remain; why? all the best urban
1 person likes this
• India
26 Mar 10
Definitely. The question of 'why' would not have been addressed. Was it Einstein who said that it is the question of 'why' that breathes fire into the equation... which was rather a different way to say that 'why' adds meaning to the equation we are dealing with. Btw, when some people argue that Science deals with everything I would ask them if Science deals with grammar... hmmm!
@bird123 (10643)
• United States
24 Mar 10
Lack of knowledge is always limiting.Scientist walk toward God whether they realize it or not. Man will get there. It will take lots of time, lots of lessons, and lots of growing.Remember, at one point in time, man only had the wheel.Mankind is coming along.
1 person likes this
@klaudyou (501)
24 Mar 10
Could be. And it's probably what holds us back from reaching the "next step". All the science we know is based on what can be proven by experiment. Science is deductive in its nature, although there are sciences that use induction as a method, like sociology, anthropology and others. I we think only about mathematics or physics, yes, they are limited, because the principle is to go rationally from general to particular... and there are few general truths they are based on: rules of addition, deduction and the like and in physics the natural laws like gravity, relativity and the other. Philosophy was the mother of all sciences way back in antiquity and it dealt with all methods of thinking and with all kinds of notions both abstract, concrete, from this world or just imagined, made up... maybe this is the key to cover more ground more quickly. I have the feeling we are moving to slow, too, and that the methods we currently use to gain knowledge are limited...
• India
26 Mar 10
I am not sure if Philosophy was called that way. But I heard that Theology was called the queen of Science, and Philosophy its handmaid way back in Medieval period. Anyway, thanks for posting your thoughts here.
• India
24 Mar 10
if the science is limited to inquiry of matter, then it is incomplete science. because matter can reveal only that much what is there in it. modern science deals mostly with matter. so the limitations. but there existed a humanity for whom science was something living. they had inquired everything beyond matter. they explored the subtle world that is beyond. when one chases matter to find god, its natural the search ends in disaster. the very first step on inquiry itself starts on the wrong side. Simply put - God is beyond existence. affirming or denying, both are utterly wrong. god does not belong to what you know or what you do not know. he is beyond both these. We can search the god within ourselves, then go beyond this body (Matter) into the subtle world. This is not a prediction. I am talking about a possibility that one might encounter on the way. possibilities are that one might see oneself in others - TatTvamAsi. when one can see oneself in other, then sooner or later you can reach the stage of Aham Brahmasmi - I Am God. In my personal opinion - Neti, Neti - neither this nor that is the right way to search. keep eliminating everything till one does not have anything else in hand to eliminate. if god is neither this nor that, at the end of search what remains, that is him. Modern science uses methods that are irrelevant. its relevance is only on matter. matter has limitations. so long as one considers inquiry on matter only as science, they are limited in their inquiry of the reality. there is much more to be inquired beyond matter.
• India
24 Mar 10
By Science I mean the natural science. For someone like Aristotle study of Biology, Astronomy, Philosophy, Religion, Political theory etc was all under one package. But such study of different disciplines under one umbrella is now virtually impossible. If God does not belong to what you know nor what you don't know then what is it? If God is neither this nor that, I think, that fits very well into, in Aristotle's words, 'that which rocks dream about'-- nothing. If "I am God' is right, then there is referential entity. So God is neither this nor that makes no sense because there is an entity, which is me.
• India
25 Mar 10
you have taken the stand to define science the way it suits you. there are things impossible for you or for many, but there is nothing impossible. science is facts, information that are relevant. to make a statement I Am God is not an easy one. any fool can say that without knowing anything about it. to make that statement with fully knowing it not possible for everyone. but we can definitely reach there. Neither this nor that wont make any sense to a person like you. that is very clearly evident from your reply itself. all your arguments are centered around body centered and matter oriented. you seem to have difficulty in breaking out of that. that is probably you have been more book oriented and never risked to experiment fearing failure. you rely more on the words of authorities than on your own experience. because you are too afraid to venture out into something about which you have no knowledge. your argument is more like those medieval church leaders who dont want to face the truth inspite of being proven wrong decisively.
• India
25 Mar 10
In universities there is these programmes called B.Sc and B.A and B.Com etc. Why do you think study of Chemistry is B.Sc and not B.A.? There is this Commerce, Science, Social Science, Arts etc. Why is there such division? Disciplines like History, Economics, Political Science etc come under Social Science because they systematically study interaction and behaviour of human individuals and societies. Whereas disciplines like Physics, Chemistry, Zoology, Botany etc are systematic study of nature. They are called Science. I see Social Science as different from Science in this manner. Well, if you think this is just my definition to suit myself, then we may as well have difference of opinion.
• India
24 Mar 10
Well, Science is a reverse engineering process. It is not usually applied as there are people who wouldn't agree that nature was ever actually engineered by someone. We, the human beings have limitations and imperfections. This is why our creations are too imperfect and limited. We can't and shouldn't deny this fact. It doesn't matter either. What we should consider is that whether our inclination is towards perfection or not. If you wish to be perfect you can at least be close to it. But anyone who doesn't wish for improvements can't be called a superior human being. We shouldn't blame science. All those efforts are just to demystify the origin that was always been shrouded. Its inability to affirm God doesn't prove its falsity. Many people don't believe in God's existence as there is not yet any proof of it. God's existence can be felt and only by a pure and sensible soul. It is a process, a difficult trial. There are few people who actually can do that, no matter what they say they do. Science is created by men like those, by people like us. It is quite expected that it will have its own limitations too. God bless you
1 person likes this
@BLD367 (142)
• United States
2 Jul 10
Science is merely a methodology. Its basic premise is to find a way to quantify whatever it is studying at the time. When that is done, various analysis are made so as to make educated guesses so more sophisticated and revealing methods can be used to establish a model of whatever it is studying. Science unfortunately can only study what it can effectively measure. In certain cases though, it needs to make assumptions so that an appropriate test can be developed. As far as God is concerned, all faith is based on a high personal and subjective internal experience. Science cannot measure these things, only make assumptions about its nature.
• India
2 Jul 10
Thanks for responding. I think science has to with laws as well, and not just mere methodology. we employ methodology to arrive at theories and laws.