Quote:
Originally Posted by duga
While I think you can make a "working hypothesis" based on science, there are still limitations to its application. The problem with science in relation to philosophy is that science won't say we know anything until we have hard evidence pointing to whatever it is we are curious about.
|
I don't think this is quite right. It's a well known "fact" you can't prove anything
What you do in science is gather evidence, typically by trying to prove your hypothesis is wrong (attempt to prove null-hypothesis) and then basically building evidence for your case. After all, it typically "only" requires a certainty of 95% or more for an assumption to be accepted as "true".
Quote:
|
While you and I could probably go back and forth on very specific details and how that relates to life in the bigger picture, it still doesn't answer a lot of the philosophical questions people have. One day, maybe will be have advanced science enough to be able to provide these answers, but for now there is a limit. This is why people aren't satisfied with a scientific answer when they are asking a philosophical question.
|
At some point, you just have to apply a little faith and I think people might as well put faith in the things that seem the most likely, ie. is supported by the most evidence.
Of course, that's just how I feel and I realize that.