I have always respected the Science Philosophy of Peter Atkins, a well known UK science supporter. In an interview he attempted to answer that old perennial question
You have said previously that science can explain everything and has no limits. Is this more than just a figure of speech?
His answer was
"Let me clarify slightly. By science I mean the scientific method. I see no bounds to the scientific method. That is: going out doing controlled experiments, setting them into a network of grand ideas and then leading to a broader understanding and the revision of ideas, a progression towards full understanding.
I see no reason why that approach cannot be applied throughout human experience. And I can see no valid argument against it. Arguments which are called invalid are normally those to do with human sentiment and I see no reason why the scientific method cannot be applied to understanding the origin of human sentiment. Of course, in the end, it all comes down to asking the two principle questions which have to be confronted, to be validated.
The first being, “ can it explain the origin of everything out of nothing?”, and the second, “ can it explain consciousness or the attributes of consciousness?”
0
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
Recent Visitors 1
Photos 22 More
Posted by McfluwsterA CHALLENGE For fun Would someone like to re-arrange this image from elsewhere in this forum into " A periodic table of Berries in the USA"?
Posted by McfluwsterMy new year's gift to promoite the best creative science and hence improve the rest of your life, but you have to engage with these sentences to get their ...
Posted by McfluwsterThis is the way to imrove your life through science education of YOURSELF.
Posted by McflewsterSeveral ways of encouraging science that works .
Posted by McflewsterHow many of you have had this kind of experience on Christmas or any other day?
Posted by McflewsterIs this true? Were you experimentally dangerous when young?
Posted by McflewsterA comment posted from a discussion on this site by Hank This is just for you! It is an experimental layout and sequences of scientific method.
Posted by Mcflewster COMPARING THE EFFICIENCY OF FACE MASKS The N95 is different with and without a valve It does not protect other people because it lets out unfiltered air.
Posted by McflewsterJust a reminder
Posted by McflewsterHelpful and really interesting on covid transmission risk in different indoor/outdoor situations.
Posted by McflewsterI am at this instant attending the American Humanist conference Wish I had thought of this name first (below) [happy-science.org] [agnostic.com]
Posted by McflewsterTo see the way ahead on your journey [agnostic.com]
Posted by McflewsterHow science leads to Humanism [youtu.be] [agnostic.com]
Posted by McflewsterLast night I watched a video presentation introducing me to the work of Ask For Evidence.
Posted by McflewsterLast night I watched a video presentation introducing me to the work of Ask For Evidence.
Posted by McflewsterPlease help me to convince people that COMMON SENSE IS NOT THE SAME THING AS SCIENCE.