Scientific-minded people believe themselves to be the most rational minds today. They have associated rationality with one method of inquiry (i.e. scientific method) and have abolished all other sources of data and knowledge. This seems to me more like a limitation than an advantage, precisely because science cannot deal with the whole spectrum of our experience. It works simply on the observable external phenomena and has yet to contribute to an understanding of human consciousness. It pretended for many centuries to get rid of this uncomfortable fact but the shadow of consciousness has crept into modern physics and it is now clear that even basic physical concepts such as mass, distance, velocity, time, are dependent on an observer. In a broader sense, rationality should encompass more than just science and its mother logic, considering that science is narrowly limited by its inability to connect with our whole experience of life. In other words, we are aware of things that the analytic mind cannot formulate. The rational discourse of science is incomplete; it cannot be the entire picture since it lacks insight into our inner life which is as real and undeniable as the external world. For this reason we can learn about life equally as much from a scientific treatise as from a novel, a poem, a kiss or a beautiful landscape.
—
(This is not an attempt to invalidate science but simply a reminder that the powerful mystery of life cannot be grasped from one perspective. Those that are dedicated to the exploration of existence must remember: there are no official paradigms; we alone bestow authority to whatever we choose to believe. We cannot limit the cosmos to certain aspects of itself, it is beyond our attempts to reduce it to one knowable thing.)
i didnt get exactly what you mean when u use the word “know”. I agree partially with you however because i believe there are different kinds of knowledge. But it is also true that scientific knowledge is the one that offers us material gain and can be really questioned for its truthfulness. objectivity may not always apply but it seems to apply to a lot of things. I also have to remind you that sciense will always be a work in procces and can change form along the way. an example of this is how quantum mechanics and chaos theory changed the view of scientists about the world.
i meant a work in progress sorry
Thanks for your comments. I wrote this piece quite a long time ago. It was interesting to go back and hear myself chipping at the monolith of science. Of course, Science does have a lot to teach us. I guess I was just trying to say that it should not be the only Teacher.
Science with its limitations is a wonderful tool, but we should not forget its historical character, which belongs to a very recent history of our species. There are realms science has not yet ventured into, perhaps one day will, but for now it must walk along other currents such as Art, Mysticism and Consciousness.
well said! it reminds me of what the Dalai lama once said about religion and science.