| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Could science (in theory, at least) explain everything in the world? |
| Yes |
|
33% |
[ 3 ] |
| No |
|
55% |
[ 5 ] |
| Depends (please provide your reasoning below) |
|
11% |
[ 1 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 9 |
|
| Author |
Message |
David 
to wish impossible things
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: the edge of the deep green sea
|
| Post subject: Can science explain everything? |  |
|
Obviously there are many things that we do not currently know about the universe, the world or human beings. But are there some things that are simply beyond the reach of any possible scientific method, now or in the future? If so, what are they?
_________________
"Every time we witness an injustice and do not act, we train our character to be passive in its presence." – Julian Assange |
|
|
|
 |
Tannin 
Can't remember
Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Location: Huon Valley Tasmania
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Science cannot explain unknowable things. (Neither can anything else, but that isn't the question.)
Anything that can be known, science can explain (if not today, sometime in the future) because that's what science is - it is the set of best-available methods for finding out about things.
Anytime a new and better method for finding things comes along, it is stress-tested and, if it really is a better method, it becomes part of the scientific method.
_________________
�Let's eat Grandma.� Commas save lives! |
|
|
|
|
King Monkey
Joined: 15 Apr 2009
Location: On a journey to seek the scriptures of enlightenment....
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Science cannot explain the popularity of those Kardashians people. So, no.
_________________
"I am a great sage, equal of heaven.
Grow stick, grow.
Fly cloud, fly.
Oh you are a dee-mon, I love to fiiight." |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie 
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto
|
| Post subject: | |
|
^
Actually it can.
Large numbers of very stupid people with TV's is your starting point.  
_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
Pa Marmo
Side by Side
Joined: 16 Jun 2003
Location: Nicks BB member #617
|
| Post subject: | |
|
True empirical science can explain many things, but there is so much more it cannot. Science doesn't even come close on matters of morals, the heart, our minds and anything that cannot be observed in the here and now.
_________________
Genesis 1:1 |
|
|
|
|
3.14159 
Joined: 12 Sep 2009
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Since can't explain the genius of Dickens, the music of Mozart or what inspired Vincent to paint Starry night.
All the rest science has or will find an answer for. |
|
|
|
|
Mugwump
Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Location: Between London and Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
^ I think it can explain those things, Pi, just not in a way that we find satisfactory as an explanation. Define the concept of explanation more precisely, and the answer will be a more secure "yes" or "no" depending on your definition.
_________________
Two more flags before I die! |
|
|
|
|
Wokko 
Come and take it.
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Tannin wrote: | Science cannot explain unknowable things. (Neither can anything else, but that isn't the question.)
Anything that can be known, science can explain (if not today, sometime in the future) because that's what science is - it is the set of best-available methods for finding out about things.
Anytime a new and better method for finding things comes along, it is stress-tested and, if it really is a better method, it becomes part of the scientific method. |
The unknowable is dealt with by philosophy. |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Getting in before Ptiddy joins the party, pretty sure you could explain every human response to any stimuli with a combination of brain chemistry, neural and physiological reactions.
So Science can explain everything. Doesn't mean that the explanation is always correct.
_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
Tannin
Can't remember
Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Location: Huon Valley Tasmania
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| stui magpie wrote: | | Getting in before Ptiddy joins the party, pretty sure you could explain every human response to any stimuli with a combination of brain chemistry, neural and physiological reactions. |
But that isn't "explaining" it, it's just describing it. It doesn't give us a full or comprehensive understanding of it, it just provides a lot of detail which obscures as much as it explains. PTID's approach to "understanding" The Mona Lisa would provide copious and detailed description of the paint chemistry and the layering of the pigments - and leave us not much wiser at the end of it than when we started. (All interesting stuff, mind you, just not answering the questions we started with.)
To understand rather than just describe we need a proper understanding of biology, ecology, evolutionary processes, history, and the dynamic of animal, human, and social action. PTID's button counting approach is a useful and important background study, but we shouldn't mistake it for "understanding".
_________________
�Let's eat Grandma.� Commas save lives! |
|
|
|
|
Tannin
Can't remember
Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Location: Huon Valley Tasmania
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| stui magpie wrote: | | So Science can explain everything. Doesn't mean that the explanation is always correct. |
That is the point. Science is self-correcting. Sometimes it takes time, sometimes mistakes endure well past their use-by, but it does self correct. This ability to self-correct is what sets scientific knowledge apart from other forms of knowledge.
(Notice that this very same ability to self-correct, on a generational timescale, is what sets successful life apart from all other items in the universe.)
_________________
�Let's eat Grandma.� Commas save lives! |
|
|
|
|
3.14159
Joined: 12 Sep 2009
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Mugwump wrote: | | ^ I think it can explain those things, Pi, just not in a way that we find satisfactory as an explanation. Define the concept of explanation more precisely, and the answer will be a more secure "yes" or "no" depending on your definition. |
Science (like religion) can explain anything.
It can codify, quantify, identify, critique explain the chemical, neurological, biological, social conditions needed to drive the creative spirit to produce great (or even bad) Art (the same can be said of the great scientists).
What science cannot do is derive a formula to replicate it under laboratory or even predict it under real life conditions.
What is it that drives some of us to tower over the rest of humanity?
Who knows? Science certainly doesn't!
(Science can't even explain why some people like some forms of music and others don't).
The answer most likely lies in Heisenberg's uncertainty principle but that by it's very definition puts art in a realm that science can never predict or duplicate.
I have a lot more to say on the subject but I'm not very good with the written word so I'll just say ...
Maybe one dae in (in the far far distant future) art and science will merge and we will evolve into something approaching what could best be described as demi-godhood(?).
If we last that long I suspect the question "can science explain everything?" (& what is the meaning of life) will've been answered and replaced by even more complex questions! |
|
|
|
|
Mugwump
Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Location: Between London and Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
^ Pi, I can agree with that. It all depends on what you mean, expect or want from an explanation, really - how you define it. Books have been written about that for centuries.
_________________
Two more flags before I die! |
|
|
|
|
David
to wish impossible things
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: the edge of the deep green sea
|
| Post subject: | |
|
I don't see art as quarantined from science, and I think you're going down the wrong track if you're using quantum mechanics to explain it. Art is just a facet of human behaviour (communication, to be exact), and all human behaviour in my view is biological (and thus explainable, testable and replicable via the scientific method).
_________________
"Every time we witness an injustice and do not act, we train our character to be passive in its presence." – Julian Assange |
|
|
|
|
Neil Appleby
Joined: 11 Feb 1998
Location: Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Obviously science cannot explain everything but it's by far the best bet we have. The thing with scientists is, they love to be proven wrong. Scientists believe in truth and seek to provide answers with evidence. When a scientist is proved wrong by the evidence presented by a colleague, he/she is generally delighted at the discovery of the new knowledge. This is in stark contrast to the religious among us; they refuse to acknowledge proven scientific fact. Even something as obvious as evolution.
_________________
After the epic draw comes the decisive knockout!
Collingwood rules the world again and Mick Malthouse fulfils his destiny with the twenty ten premiership and can you hear the people sing! |
|
|
|
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
