Science-The Way to Truth

 What is science?

In general, science is the study of nature by systematic, open, and objective way. Nature refers to all things. The universe, forest, sun, man, mind, god and all things are nature or nature's elements.

Today, the science is classified into three categories:
  • Natural Sciences (physics, chemistry, biology etc)
  • Social Sciences (sociology, history, literature etc)
  • Artificial Sciences (accounting, administration etc)

    Why science?

    Have you ever wondered why or how you are here? What is the thing that is you? Why birds fly, water flow, and rain fall? Why man dies? Why do we have to eat? Why we fight? Is earth flat? What is earth? How do I know? What is knowing? What is certain? And so forth. River of questions flow. We seek answers. Science is a method used to seek answers. Science leads to answers within certain contexts and limits.

    Science aids in the invention and use of technology. Using science man has searched the depth of sea, marched to Mars and beyond, built robots and towering structures, cured diseases, and provided electromagnetic energy to the world.

    Why science is so special, compared to other forms of seeking answers such as religion or literature?

    The method employed by science is more effective in explaining and predicting nature than religion or literature. Arguably science is more open to all subject areas, where other two are limited in scope. Christian/Islamic traditions mainly rely on the scriptures, which at times contradict some ordinary observations. Literature usually limits it self to the human subjective experiences and explorations.

    What is the method of science?

    Curiosity, experience, experiment or something prompts us to suppose that certain event, or pattern occurs in a certain way in a given context. Formally, such supposition is called hypothesis.

    But, how can we be sure?

    Through careful observation and/or experimentation we may verify that such event or pattern occurs in a certain way in a given context. The observation may take place when the event or pattern repeats, or an experiment can be performed to stimulate or create the event or the pattern.

    Finally, we propose a myth, story, or theory as describing the event or the pattern.

    The strength of theory depends on its simplicity and predictive or explanatory capability.

    Why trust science?

    My views run along the same line as Barbara Yarusso. She states that "the starting point for all of science and engineering rests on our belief that the world is rational. There is another necessary article of faith in the foundations of science. That is that the truths behind our observations of the universe are unchanging (in contrast to our attempts to formulate theories to describe them)." Further, she states that "science must begin with the basic assumptions of the validity of observation (empiricism), logic, and the rationality of the universe. Since we generally recognize (most) science as an attempt to draw conclusions and make predictions about (i.e., model) the physical universe4 we actually occupy (with cosmology perhaps a notable exception), it is not enough to postulate our assumptions as though they are merely hypothetical. To believe that the rational conclusions that follow have predictive value, we must hold these assumptions to be actually true."

    I agree that humans have the capacity to reason, but they also behave irrationally. In fact, some chose to act in irrational manner; kind of test to their free will. Rational behavior or outcome is conventional, and can not be defined absolutely. If humans are not rational, or they chose not to be, then is the universe rational? We do trust our observations, but there is a paradox. We know that our observations seldom lie. We are aware that our senses have limited capacity, and subjective. Our world does not evolve in a linear or always progressive path. The world events are non-linear, out of the blue so to speak, and unpredictable. Should I really trust the physical world to be rational, logical, and observable?

    You raise some important objections. There exists certain tension, skepticism in living our life, and doing science. Nevertheless, we tend to trust more, because the alternative of cynicism. Cynicism is not valuable. We trust enough to built technology, and I think we must take the "leap of faith" in trusting some sanity about the world in which we live. We have nothing to loose in trusting free will, and in the ultimate sanity of the universe. I believe that makes life more tolerable, and lets me explore. For now, death seems to be always there, so why hurry it.

    Can science explain everything? More pointed question is what is the limit of science?

    As children we are unconscious of our place in the universe. As we grow we become aware of us, humanity, and the universe. We become aware of our historical existence. The truth is brute, we don't understand why exactly we individually, and humanity as a collective are here at this point, doing whatever. Most of us just take a stock, accept and let the world be, then we think of ways to just go about our business of living. Similarly, science finds it self here and now at this stage. It may progress or decline, we can not know that absolutely. Science just takes a stock, accepts its lot, and goes about its business. The question you pose is meaningless, when viewed in this context.

    However, note that man has successfully cured many diseases, built computers, and landed on moon and so forth. Still we have failed in significant ways. We have not ended poverty, even though we can. We have not avoided wars, even though we deplore its effects. We have not extended the life expectancy, as we should have. Thus, the four elements of life: suffering, sickness, old age, and death that Buddha agonized over two thousand years ago are still with us.

    Technically, scientists and mathematician find if difficult to model and describe "complexity". Science can not answer why things the way they are. Science can not answer the moral questions of what is right and wrong. Not all the avenues can be explored, because the resources we have are limited. Not all the avenues will be explored, because we may not chose to. Thus, the limits of science are technical, theoretical, economical, structural, and social.

    Is electricity a product of science?
    (Continuity Question)