Header Ads Widget

Your Advertisement Here

Science As a Physical Phenomena -- False Science?

Science & Religion for the Perplexed:

Of late I have been engaged in a discussion with Tom and Todd about whether or not Intelligent Design (ID) is scientific. Todd and I say it is not; Tom says it is. Related to this, the question I would like to address is: Is my — admittedly cursory — definition of science as a "search for physical explanations for physical phenomena" acceptable? That is, by confining science to the physical, am I doing it injustice? Tom seems says yes to this question in the following statement:

As scientists, we don’t blindly and obstinately hold to the less explanatory and more inconsistent theory for some philosophical reason, i.e., that only other physical phenomena can be responsible for the current state of physical phenomena. There is no a priori reason why that explanation has to itself be physical. It either could be, or it could not be. Thus, if there are supernatural "realities," as I believe, then we cannot assume that they have no interaction with the physical.

To understand better the cargo cult science, as Richard Feynman defined false science, please head over to: psnt.net

Post a Comment


  1. You're right, in order to achieve true career success one has to be prepared to make major transformations along the way. My personal inspiration is Steve Jobs who is a master at changing the status quo. Although many people criticized him for micro-managing, personally handling various aspects of his companies from product design to online master program, he will be remembered as a visionary who revolutionized four industries: computers, music, phones and digital animation.