Is science a tool, or a source of philosophy?

by EdenOne 12 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • Kalos
    Kalos

    EdenOne,

    Nice thought!

    I agree with Apognophos.

    The very fact that scientific community is made of both theists and atheists gives us a clue—outsiders too can arrive at their own conclusions.

    For some the universe is laden with spiritual significance. “We do tend to see natural events as more than natural events.” (God Instinct, Jesse Bering).

    For others universe is just a random event in the cosmic lottery of things, just a physical phenomenon with no spiritual component, that events are random and have no deeper meaning or purpose; and people and living things merely as a collection of atoms, and essentially no different from any other unfeeling, non-sentient structures such as rocks soil, mountains or planets… (implying that there can be no consequences to our actions).

    Yet, even if that were true, it certainly doesn't mean that we can't care about the universe because, we are capable of wonder and love. Meaning, we can infuse it with the same whether it cares or not.

  • Oubliette
    Oubliette

    Kalos, nice summary!

  • GLTirebiter
    GLTirebiter

    Is science a tool, or a source of philosophy?

    Rather than being either it its source or its tool, science is a branch of philosophy. For most of western history, what we now know as "science" was called "natural philosophy." Science is philosophy directed to knowing the natural world. In other words, science is a subset of philosophy.

    The "scientific method" is a tool. It applies empirical methods to extend knowledge of the world, starting from more limited previous knowledge, observations, and axioms.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit