Science ignores God because it has to.
Science studies the natural world. Anything supernatural is beyond its scope. God is, literally, beyond science.
It used to bother me that scientists were looking for the natural mechanism for life to start (also called "Abiogenesis"). Once I realized that science does this because it must -- it only deals in the natural world; a supernatural explanation doesn't fit. Science, to keep being as amazing it is, must stay focused on the natural.
Eugenie Scott makes the excellent point that naturalism -- which is science -- is different from philosophical naturalism, which is not. Philosophical naturalism says that there is no God, there is nothing beyond the physical universe. And that could be true, but such is a claim of philosophy, not science.
Because science is limited to the natural world, there will never be scientific proof for God.
Does that mean science can't study religion? Not exactly. Science can study people and their experiences but -- as always -- the answers are going to be merely descriptive. This happens when.
Chesterton makes the point, then, that science keeps bumping into magic. Why does a seed grow and become a tree? Ultimately, the answer is indistinguishable from magic, even if we can tell you every step of the trick.
Do you have anything to add to this discussion? Let's learn more, together!
~Luke
Theblogogy
No comments :
Post a Comment