Why science is OK even though it misses the main point

[pastorlenny]

Physicists are doing their best to discover more about God. They just keep missing His consciousness and will. But that's OK, because they have not yet been able to locate their own consciousness and will either. You see, it turns out that this is very difficult work -- and that to do it, you need to hire not physicists, but metaphysicists.

Comments

[honeygirl1946]

Hey Lenny! I was beginning to think you were in the Witness Protection Program :)

[pastorlenny]

I am! That's why the shades.

Was on vacation last week -- and off the grid.

[topf]

I love metaphysics but for other reasons. I am not sure I like God. But I do like going beyond what science as we know it does.

[pastorlenny]

You're not supposed to like the real God. :)

[jkhuggins]

From where I sit, it's not that "science misses the main point". Science is very good at answering questions about "how" and "when", but not so good at answering questions about "why" and "who". Not surprisingly, religion is much better at answering questions about "why" and "who", but not so good at "how" and "when".

Both groups get into trouble when they try to answer questions outside of their sweet spots.

[pastorlenny]

I don't think I was making an assertion about religion. I was making an assertion about empirical methodologies not being the be-all and end-all of the human epistemic enterprise.