Back in engineering school, I had a discussion with a student. He believed that given an infinite amount of time, science will be able to explain the mechanisms of phenomena that are currently inexplicable with a scientific framework (eg. the success of some alternative medicines).
I followed up with the question, "When this universe was created, was it created for humans? Was it built in anticipation of human life?"
My friend said, "No. Life on earth is the consequence of randomness."
"If the universe wasn't created for humans, why do you insist human reasoning will uncover all of it's mysteries?"
I never got an answer to this questions, so I'm asking it again now, "Why do people believe so faithfully in science or human rationality?" At least with religion, there's a catch-all solution for the inexplicable - "Just have faith." Science beats itself by professing there's a reasonable explanation to all things!
Concepts built off of the scientific framework are more unstable than it's religious counterpart. In Object Oriented Programming terms, science lacks a try{} catch{} construct to catch unforeseen exceptions and complex scenarios. In religion, "faith" is the catch statement that commonly handles complexities not worthwhile to solve. There is no equally effective catch statement in science, and that's why gravity will forever remain a theory.
Traditional Chinese Medicine is an entire paradigm the scientific community hasn't been able to explain:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traditional_chinese_medicine
Science is a self-validating framework, just like other popular religions. So of course it WORKS when measured against it's own standards.
Yes, we've created many laws of physics, and yet, we still can't explain gravity. Back in the day, Descartes theory of vortices was an attempt at explaining the "physical mechanisms" that govern the operation of gravity. But then Newton came along and said, "No, forget WHAT it is, just write a bunch of rules like F=MA to model it's behaviour." So there you have it, scientists and physicists saying, "we have no idea what it really is, we can only predict it's behaviour." Composition and behaviour are two different things. So that's why I'm glad you said, "Science has never said that there is a reasonable explanation for all things," because the smug attitudes of students suggests otherwise.
If science isn't the answer, why can't God be the answer? Or ninjas? Or Lepricons? Why can't we stop looking for a scientific answer and fall back on something more contrived or creative to make people "happier"? What could possibly go wrong? We live in villages trading grain? We weave baskets for a living? We declare our love to princesses in castles? That doesn't sound so bad.
Religion offers the comfort of closure in God (or ninjas). Science offers a never-ending pursuit into oblivion. Ask any person in Sales and s/he will say it's so much easier to market a product with a happy ending. That's why science will never completely supplant religion, because it's sales pitch is kinda lame.
Thanks for your comments!
"The only thing religion has ever done is start a few wars." - you bought into the marketing of atheists...
Science has started a few wars of its own...survival of the fittest? global warming?
Before you say "science was mis-used", consider religious people using the same answer for religion.
Science hasn't been able to explain traditional Chinese medicine? According to your own article: "Much of the scientific research on TCM has focused on acupuncture. The effectiveness of acupuncture remains controversial in the scientific community, and a review by Edzard Ernst and colleagues in 2007 found that the body of evidence was growing, research is active, and that the 'emerging clinical evidence seems to imply that acupuncture is effective for some but not all conditions'."
Acupuncture is effective for some but not all conditions. More research is being done. What's the problem?
Science works because that's the whole point. Scientific theories are actually TESTED. If it fails the test, it's thrown out as wrong. If it passes the test, it's kept around. If it passes every test over a period of many many years, it's basically assumed to be true.
Newton was very smart: trying to figure out WHY things are is a futile gesture. Figuring out HOW things work is incredibly immeasurably useful. We might not know what gravity "is" but we damn sure know how it works.
I don't know exactly how much money I have in my bank account right now. Maybe I should just believe I have $1 million in there to make myself happy. Does that make sense to you? The idea that you can believe whatever you want when something is unknown is completely ridiculous. Of course religion has a better sales pitch. "I will make you Emperor of the world in exchange for one chocolate Easter bunny" is a fantastic sales pitch, but it's a complete lie. Science is all about being honest. Sometimes, people don't want honesty, but that's not our fault.
Science didn't START any wars. With or without science, survival of the fittest would still start wars. Science EXPLAINS why people go to war. Science certainly didn't "start" global warming either. What, global warming didn't exist until somebody discovered it? If only it were that easy. Let's stop looking for asteroids headed towards earth because they don't exist if we don't discover them. Don't forget that the atomic bomb ended World War II.
http://www.PhilipBrocoum.com
@phil - good comment, here's my response
I don't know anything about acupuncture, so I can't speak much about it. Although I can say with certainty that acupuncture is only a small aspect of TCM. The only TCM I've used are herbal medicines. I've listened to doctors explain my ailments in terms of ying-yang theory, the classical elements, life-style balance and failures of particular organs. The framework is very mature, and goes far beyond the placebo effect. You can do more research on the specifics if you're really interested. Doctors in the east have acknowledged the need for both western and eastern medical practices for a "complete" approach, whereas here in the west, it is a much more contentious issue. The principles of western medicine and eastern medicine are at odds with each other, so doctors in China essentially concluded - forget trying to evaluate opposing paradigms using each other's principles, just apply each system where they are most effective. In this respect, they took the Newton's approach - just develop something "immeasurably useful".
I agree that science is about testing and measuring something quantitative. That's why when you evaluate it based on "testing and measuring", it is a complete success. Religion is about spirituality, so when you evaluate it against things like faith, morals, humanity using its own "laws", it's probably a complete success as well. Any framework that has been around long enough is self-validating.
"The idea that you can believe whatever you want when something is unknown is completely ridiculous. " I'm going to rephrase your statement. Tell me if you like it, "The idea that you can believe whatever you want when there's no better explanation is completely reasonable." Pretty good right? It has the added benefit of inspiring creativity and creating great stories.
Sure sometimes people don't want honesty, and that's when science completely falls apart. That's why science will never completely supplant religion. Science is incomplete when measured by spiritual frameworks. But if you mix in a cup of pseudo-science, several slices of marketing, and a dash of grandiose fabrications, it can be the next biggest thing since Confucianism.
I agree science didn't start any wars. But are you implying that without religion, there would be no wars? Ants don't have religion, and yet they organize themselves into armies and destroy colonies. "Religion cause wars" is great propaganda I use to get atheists to fight fundamentalists. It works every single time.
I am happy with the possibility we may need several frameworks for "progress", even if they aren't based on rationality. It doesn't bother me if science isn't the ONE ultimate unifying theory. Does it matter to you? Diversity is the gift of mother nature.
Quickly, I have no problem with people THEORIZING whatever they want in the face of unknown questions, but actually BELIEVING that they have the answer... well, that's ridiculous.
There would definitely be wars without religion. South Park has a great episode where Cartman goes into the future and the atheists are all fighting amongst themselves over some stupid little reason. I think survival of the fittest probably explains why religion causes wars as well, because just as we want to propagate our genes and eliminate competition, so do we wish to propagate our religion and obliterate competition as well.
http://www.PhilipBrocoum.com
oh..sure you can say science EXPLAINS wars, but many leaders have used it to rationalize and encourage war. Global warming is caused by green house gas emissions which wouldn't reach it's current crisis if we never invented the science that gave us the industrial revolution.
But anyway, as you've basically stated in your last comment, guns don't kill people, people kill people. So obviously, religion gets a bad rep because leaders abuse its powers.
"If the universe wasn’t created for humans, why do you insist human reasoning will uncover all of it’s mysteries?" This question isn't legitimate. There is no such thing as "human" reasoning. Reasoning is reasoning. We were lucky enough to evolve to understand, reason, and use rational thoughts... at least most of us :)
The success of alternative medicines is easily explained: the placebo effect is very powerful. Also, 99% of ailments your body can cure on its own within, say, one or two weeks. It's perfectly understandable that people think whatever herbs and spices they happen to be taking during those two weeks are what cured them.
The universe being created specifically for humans is a common way of backwards thinking. In reality, humans were created specifically for this universe. We breathe oxygen because that's what is in the air. If the air was full of methane or whatever we would have evolved to breathe that.
I haven't a clue as to why it would matter if the universe was made for us or not. That's no reason why we can or can't understand it.
People have faith in science because it WORKS. It got us to the moon, we have computers, television, medicine, clothing, cities, cars, airplanes, etc. The only thing religion has ever done is start a few wars.
Science has never said that there is a reasonable explanation for all things. That's no reason to stop looking, however. As far as we can tell, everything has an explanation. We know how every organ in the human body works, we know all the laws of physics, it seems like we live in a reasonable universe. Nothing we have come across would suggest otherwise.
Think of all we have been able to explain in the past few hundred years, and then imagine all the stuff we will be able to explain in the next few hundred.
The big problem is that just because science doesn't have answer doesn't mean "God" is the answer. It simply means we don't know and we should keep looking. We used to think the stars in the sky were gods. Whoops, it turns out we were wrong, they're just big balls of fire.
http://www.PhilipBrocoum.com