I have frequently noticed people commenting that there are many unanswered questions but science may not be able to provide all answers.

I have always placed complete faith in science and have probably never thought in this direction or probably I am ignorant.  Considering that science deals only with the nature, it is understood that it cannot be asked to find answers to questions about the supernatural. After finding the truth about the origin of the universe and the origin of life, the remaining questions are in my opinion just missing links. What are such questions then that science will not answer and why? What are its limitations? Time? Funds? Human resources? Lack of interest or efforts on the part of humans? Or is the present knowledge inadequate for further research? I would like my more enlightened friends here to educate me on this subject.

Views: 885

Replies to This Discussion

There are big questions that science has not answered yet.   For example, there are many clever theories about the origin of life but no certainty about which of these, if any, is right.  In addition, scientists are still baffled by the "dark matter" that tugs on the visible objects in the universe like gravity and are equally baffled by the "dark energy" that pushes in the opposite direction by accelerating the expansion of the universe.  There may be other things that science has not yet discovered.   I have, not faith, but optimism, that given enough time, funds, and training, science will answer many of the current questions and others that have not yet been asked.

But the idea that there are questions that science cannot answer is very different.  It assumes that there are things that human sense organs, even when extended by scientific instruments, cannot detect.   That is the meaning of "immaterial" reality.  The category of unknowable or immaterial does not include subjective realities, which are not only by knowable by the "subject," the person experiencing them, but detectable by various scientific means, such as observing the reactions of animals, including humans, in experimental situations.  No, what is unknowable by science is what some humans assert that they know by revelation, despite the complete absence of evidence available to non-believers.  

The category of unknowable or immaterial does not include subjective realities, which are not only by knowable by the "subject," the person experiencing them, but detectable by various scientific means, such as observing the reactions of animals, including humans, in experimental situations. 

Agreed, I didn't say that subjective experiences can't be researched.  But they do tend to be ignored because they are much more difficult to observe.

There was a UCLA researcher who was even investigating hallucinations. 

One area that science isn't going to determine is human choices, i.e. "What should I do?  How should I live my life?" since that is up to the individual.  They might use science to guide their decisions but ultimately the choice is up to them.  Similarly the choices of a nation, what to prioritize, are up to the people in it. 

And art may illuminate our choices in ways that science doesn't. 

Sorry,  Laura.  I did not mean to criticize your comment at all; I only wanted to be sure that no one else misinterpreted it.  

This partly answers my question that the dark matter and the dark energy are two things science has not explained so far. I am optimistic that science will do this given reasonable time and resources.

I am a former teacher and school principal. It is just my opinion, but I feel we will always be moving toward discoveries, answers and explanations in science. The nature of science is to start with a question. Sometimes the answers are not what we are initially searching for but answer another question. Therefore, we continue searching. That is the thrill of scientific discovery. If it is there, scientists will find it. I think there is no evidence for the supernatural, rather, scientific explanations to demonstrate that the supernatural is mythology, not science.

D Hazard

I like your answer 'If it is there scientists will find it.' This my own belief and I am just seeking other answers

You are on the right track. You can spend a lifetime doing this and it would not be wasted.

There are some things that can't investigated experimentally - theories that make predictions that could in theory be verified experimentally, but in fact the experiment is beyond our current abilities and may always be.   I've heard that some aspects of string theory are that way.  And Roger Penrose came up with an "objective quantum state reduction" theory, which similarly has experimental tests that we can't do. 

...experimental tests that we can't do...YET.

... with EMPHASIS on that "YET" business!

The more you learn, the more you CAN learn.  The more you rely on dogma, the more you learn NOTHING.

 Let me make my question more clear. Science researches only nature and not anything out of or beyond nature. Are there any questions about nature that science will not answer? Nobody expects science to answer philosophical questions like 'Why we are here?' or 'What is the purpose of life?'. Are there any puzzles about nature that science can never answer?

 Ultimately is there anything out of or beyond nature anyway? Does the supernatural even exist? It is possible to conceptualize that which we cannot sense or measure if we are clever enough to ask the right question. Who is going to set the boundaries to the unknowable? With so, so much to explore of the unknown, isn't asking what is unknowable at this point a bit premature? 


© 2018   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: The Nexus Group.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service