Search

Tuesday, January 16, 2018

Epistemic Antinomies and Their Solution

Man is, on his own, doomed by either his stupidity - for if that be all he have, he could not grasp the arguments required for belief, or appreciate half of what he experienced - or his ingenuity - for if that be what he have, it is as much an agent of falsehood as it is of truth; and if he should style himself an independent thinker, he might be freed from the tyranny of those who would urge falsehood upon him, but he would also be without aid when confronted with other falsehoods that eyes more skillful than his would have warned him of.

Fortunately we are not on our own devices, and that which is needed for salvation is that which can be given to wise and foolish, intelligent and stupid - and all things wise are foolish to God, and all intelligence is but the grunts of animals to Him. For it is said by the Son: "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." (John 14:6) And he says elsewhere: “Keep on asking, and it will be given you; keep on seeking, and you will find; keep on knocking, and it will be opened to you; for everyone asking receives, and everyone seeking finds, and to everyone knocking, it will be opened." (Matthew 7:7,8) That so many do not find is to be expected for men are intent on evil and do not seek. However, for those who do seek, assurance is given. But in seeking, let us do so humbly, and without pretense.

Tuesday, January 2, 2018

Can Science Explain Anything?

It can, but you can't prove that scientifically!

And this this is because science presupposes certain things, and thus can't explain them, and thus any ultimate explanation of reality is going to be something which science has little to say. Thus to suggest that science is competent to adjudicate the debate over God's existence is like saying that physics can tell us what Moby Dick is about.

What are some of the things science presupposes, and hence can't explain? That there is a physical world external to our minds, is one, mathematics and logic is another. Even laws of nature don't explain anything, for they are merely shorthand descriptions of what things do given the kinds of things they are. They presuppose the existence of things that operate according to them, and hence can't be used to explain why anything exists at all that adheres to them.

Obviously science can't explain morality. Not that it might not say something relevant to morality. But it certainly can't explain why morality has the objective and binding force that it does. (And surely right living is more important than most of what science does say.)

So what to do we have? Science is a valuable resource, a fruitful avenue for gaining knowledge about the physical world. But it cannot justify itself, and leaves much of reality - even physical reality -  out of its description of the world, and hence unexplained; for it is not suited to explaining these things. And it can't show that God does not exist. (Though, God's existence can be shown by examining some of the things that science presupposed. And so while God's existence might not scientific, it is hardly anti-scientific or irrational. 

And this concludes my meandering remarks on science, at least for now.