The first area we can
explore to discover truth that I will discuss is science. When talking about
this topic, it is important to establish definitions. There are different
definitions for science, whether it's "the study of nature" or
"any use of the scientific method." So, I will use the following
three definitions from Webster's dictionary to establish what I mean when I use
these words:
Definition of science:
"Knowledge or a
system of knowledge covering general truths or the operation of general laws especially
as obtained and tested through the scientific method and concerned with the
physical world and its phenomena"
Definition of scientific method:
"Principles and procedures for
the systematic pursuit of knowledge involving the recognition and formulation
of a problem, the collection of data through observation and experiment, and
the formulation and testing of hypotheses"
Definition
of knowledge:
"The fact or condition of knowing something
with familiarity gained through experience or association"
With these three words defined, I
move to a discussion on science. This area of truth has been extremely
important for our understanding of the world. Thus far, science has proven to
be a very trustworthy source of truth. Why? If you have multiple people
performing the same experiment over and over, and those experiments give the
same results every time, you gather a great amount of evidence supporting the
conclusion that those same results will continue to occur. Many tested
hypotheses (i.e. if event A happens, then it will result in event B)
consistently lead to the same results, which points to the conclusion that
there is uniformity in the natural world. Using this assumption about
uniformity in nature, scientists have drawn conclusions about natural “laws”.
These laws indicate that a particular experiment or event, under the same
conditions, will lead to the same result.
A simple example of this method
involves the law of gravity. You make a hypothesis that if you drop a pencil
(assuming no anti-gravity conditions), it will move downward, towards the
Earth's core. You perform the experiment once, and it holds true. Then you drop
the pencil one hundred times, same results. Then one hundred people also
perform the experiment, pencil still drops. As more evidence is gathered, you
gain more confidence that the pencil will always drop.
This method has led to expansive
knowledge about the Earth and the Universe. However, there are some
shortcomings to science that prevent it from being the only way we can find
truth. Here are some examples and brief explanations of these shortcomings:
1. The scientific method
cannot be used to gather evidence for necessary scientific assumptions - The
assumption that the scientific method can be used to gain knowledge about
nature cannot be backed up through scientific experiment. Instead, this is
a philosophical assumption. Also, the assumption
that we can trust our intellect or senses in the first place is
philosophical. I'll write about philosophy in a future post.
2. Scientific knowledge can
only be gained through observation with the use of the five senses - This
is pretty obvious and may not seem like a big deal. However, if there is any
truth that cannot be discovered through observation using sight, taste,
hearing, touch, or smell, science cannot form conclusions about that
truth.
3. Science is limited to
drawing conclusions about repeatable events - Example: The
experiment of dropping a pencil can be repeated many times. However, a
particular instance of me performing the pencil experiment
cannot be repeated. When I dropped a pencil at 10am on 5/3/12, I cannot go back
in time and repeat that exact event. Science cannot lead to the conclusion that
I performed that experiment at that moment. This is an example of a past
event. The conclusion that a past event actually happened would need
to be drawn through history, which I'll discuss in my next
post.
4. The scientific method
cannot be used to determine truth about many questions involving life and
human existence - Some examples include, "What is
the overall purpose of my life?" "What is truth?" "Was it
immoral to steal that candy bar?" These questions cannot be answered
through repeatable and observable events. These are questions
that philosophy and religion can potentially
answer, but not science.
Why am I pointing these things out?
The worldview that science is the only method humans can use
to determine truth is common today, and I do not think it is a very reasonable
view to hold. My main point in this post is that while science is a trustworthy
area of truth, especially pertaining to knowledge about the natural world, we
need to consider other areas of truth. Science does not solely rule our search
for truth. If it does, some very significant questions about life are passed
over without consideration. To look into those questions, we need to consider
non-scientific areas. Three of those areas that I mentioned in this post and
that I may expand on are history, philosophy, and religion.
To close, I would like to point out
that my understanding of science is by no means complete. I may be incorrect
about some of the things I posted above. This post gives a pretty shallow look
into science, but I think it is sufficient to explain my main point. There are
also more examples of the shortcomings of science. But this post cannot provide
a full discussion about the topic, just like all my other posts.
