Writer's Block: Proven by Science
Aug. 12th, 2009 12:33 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
vovat[Error: unknown template qotd]
Wouldn't it pretty much have to? If science is "[t]he investigation of natural phenomena through observation, theoretical explanation, and experimentation, or the knowledge produced by such investigation," then any rational explanation is a scientific explanation, right? When people believe there are things that science can't explain, that suggests to me that they don't think there IS an explanation for them. As much as people talk about faith, it seems like belief in God or another supernatural being generally occurs because the believer thinks there IS evidence of such an entity, not because there isn't. Now, that's not to say that science has explained everything YET, or even that it ever will, but is there any way we can know ANYTHING except through observation and experimentation? Just because we don't understand something doesn't mean there isn't an explanation for it. But why listen to me? I know nothing.
Wouldn't it pretty much have to? If science is "[t]he investigation of natural phenomena through observation, theoretical explanation, and experimentation, or the knowledge produced by such investigation," then any rational explanation is a scientific explanation, right? When people believe there are things that science can't explain, that suggests to me that they don't think there IS an explanation for them. As much as people talk about faith, it seems like belief in God or another supernatural being generally occurs because the believer thinks there IS evidence of such an entity, not because there isn't. Now, that's not to say that science has explained everything YET, or even that it ever will, but is there any way we can know ANYTHING except through observation and experimentation? Just because we don't understand something doesn't mean there isn't an explanation for it. But why listen to me? I know nothing.
