Agnostic.com

14 1

Does science have all the answers to questions that matter?

Modern science is incredibly powerful, and only the foolish or the blind would say otherwise. It throws light on huge areas formerly given over to religion or philosophy or simply so-called common sense. But scientism (meaning science has all of the answers, or all of the answers that matter, all the answers to meaningful questions) is a fool’s game. It simply doesn’t and couldn’t - not only when (moral) questions about right and wrong arise,

But in the end, claims about the powers and limits of science are about science and they are not themselves scientific. Scientism therefore is a false god.

Matias 8 Aug 16
Share

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account

14 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

0

Only the use of "ism" in your statement would make it a philosophy, not a god... false or otherwise. Also science is not a god. It's a set of regulations, tests and tools to explore an understand our world as much as it is to advance technologies to try to better our world. Do some misuse those tools? Absolutely. Do some put a higher importance on science over people... no question. That still does not mean science will have all the answer straight up or that it should be seen as a literal god or even as a religion. To say so would mean you have a gross misunderstanding about what science is for, or how those in the field might see it.

AmyLF Level 7 Aug 26, 2019
0

Is there scientific evidence to consider the traditional religious conceptions of sexuality are antiscientific? Is there evidence to consider, for example, that the intersexuality spectrum implies that non-reproductive sexuality is natural and improves human health?

Quote:

Feyerabend objected to the claim tha science is superior to other modes of knowledge. He hated the tendency of western states to foist the products of science -- whether the theory of evolution or nuclear power plants-- on people against their will. "There is separation between state and church", he cried, but none "between state and science!"

Source:

Scientific American. Was philosopher Paul Feyerabend really "science's worst enemy"? October 24 / 2016.

If you were to separate both religion and science from the state, on what, pray, would the state base its policy decisions?

The separation of church and state is as much to protect the state (from undue influence from unsupportable thinking) as it is to protect the church (from one religion suppressing others via an alliance with state power) and the people (from being forced to adhere to a state religion whether they want to or not).

Or in other words people are entitled to their own beliefs so long as they don't impose them on others.

On the other hand people are not entitled to their own facts, and while science can -- and has -- been corrupted by pseudoscientific vested interests and bought and paid for "experts", that's not an indictment of the scientific method or of fact-based policy decisions. That's an indictment of government willfully ignoring scientific fact.

@mordant
There are researchers who claim that non-reproductive sex is natural and necessary for good health.
I'm not an epistemologist, I don't know if that's true.

I have been investigating in depth what the Bible teaches about sexuality and I could conclude that it teaches: 1. That non-reproductive sex is mortal sin. 2. That homosexuals and effeminates will burn in hell.

In my opinion, the Bible should not be interpreted as an indisputable truth in the area of ​​sexology, nor in any field of science.

The percentage of children born annually with Klinefelter Syndrome, in its different grades, is very high.
And this is just one genetic condition that is included within the Intersex Spectrum.

See:

  • NOVA/PBS The Intersex Spectrum.

  • NIH National Library of Medicine:
    The Klinefelter Syndrome incidence is about 1 in 650 newborn boys.

Feyerabend is a philosopher of science, an advocate of epistemological anarchism.
He says the State promotes only orthodox scientific education, which he considers outdated and anachronistic, he believes that science has become a new obscurantism.

0

"Scientism is an ideology that promotes science as the only objective means by which society should determine normative and epistemological values. The term scientism is generally used critically, pointing to the cosmetic application of science in unwarranted situations not amenable to application of the scientific method or similar scientific standards."

Scientism is an ideology. We should be very wary of ideologies. They have killed millions in Russia,China and Europe in past centuries.

0

Science doesn't have all the answers, and properly does not claim to. It tells us, e.g., how to build atomic bombs, but not whether we SHOULD. That's the provenance of philosophy, in my view, not religion. Philosophy in general is far "squishier" than science but at least tries to take an unbiased look at what is harmful or beneficial in various courses of action and thought. The presuppositionalism inherent in most religion, and the nature of religious faith as an epistemology, makes its advice more prone to be off-base, all things being equal.

1

Nah! It does have a lot of the questions though

2

Of course science does not have all the answers. But the scientific approach to problem solving has all the intellectual beauty imaginable.

zesty Level 7 Aug 16, 2019
4

Learning is an ongoing process. It is extremely unlikely that Humans, or any Alien species will ever know everything about the Universe.

3

Why would anyone regard 'science' as a god .??
Science is a process of rigorous thought, experimentation and critical analysis to extend knowledge ... it does not have all the answers .. partly because we don't yet know the questions ... partly because we are presently unable to precisely define an answer to questions we are asking.

1

The questions that concern me most can’t be answered by science or by anything else. I think those questions lie outside human purview and might be meaningless from a higher perspective. Religion, science, and philosophy might shine the light of awareness on those questions, resulting in awe and reverence, but there really are no answers. The questions are what matter because they can shake people awake.

If a person doesn’t want to face the startling facts of existence, then fear can be blunted with either scientism or religious dogma—really the same thing. It’s your choice.

0

If you frame questions that matter as things that are metaphysical or philosophical, then science has no answers whatsoever.

If you focus only questions based in reality, there is potentially no limit to the questions that science can answer.

I don't think that metaphysical questions really matter that much when our reality is molded by science and the questions asked by philosophy are based on the perception of that reality.

Also, I would argue that science can make determinations about things like morality, because you can ( in theory for now ) test what happens to a group of people under different moral conditioning, and see the results.

For example, you could test what happens to a society that has little genetic and no cultural diverity, and compare that to a society with high genetic and cultural diveristy, with a statistical average as a control group, and see how these societies develop.

2

No single area of human activity has all the answers to everything.

Except The Beast from ‘The Chaser’

2

Of course not. neither does Jesus or his Daddy.

4

Science will NEVER have all the answers. The cool thing about science is that it creates 20 new questions for every one it answers.

1

No, but it has all the right questions! 😉

Please reconsider your answer! Science often doesn’t even discern what the “right” questions might be! And so many of the questions that need our immediate attention can’t even be addressed by science! I think Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring is a fine illustration of this.

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:389572
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.