Science explains the how: Metaphysics explain the why: Limits of science

Science explains the how: Metaphysics explain the why: Limits of science

Science explains the how: Metaphysics explain the why: Limits of science

Science is mainly concerned of how a thing is made, how an object is constructed and how this object functions. It does not deal, in any way, with the why a thing exists, why an object is constructed the way it is and why an object functions. A tree for example is studied in terms of its physiology, biochemistry and functional anatomy. Each science examines the life-cycle of this living organ.

All sciences enter into the game and every scientist looks at the object of the tree in from his particular angle. Here the scientist is face with a living dimension of flora and submits this object to exact organic sciences. All scientists focusing on the tree are concerned in how a tree is born, what it needs for its survival, conditions and features of earth, air, chlorific exchanges and effects.

Then scientists are concerned with its being in as far its structure and function. How does a tree function and its patterns of functioning. They are bent to study how the tree evolves and what maintains its survival, always in terms of what is subject to empirical investigation.

Scientists bending on the study of a tree are not concerned, in any way, of why should there be a tree in the first place, and why should the tree function as it does, and why should the tree be an object of scientific investigation. They are not concerned with its origin, whether this origin is nature, auto-production or God.

They are not concerned of the finality of tree. They study the tree in order to provide better means of survival for the tree and for humans. They are concerned with the how in order to better the conditions of the tree always for use and exploitation. They are not concerned with its philosophical aspect and lesser still with its metaphysical indications.

Philosophical questioning and metaphysical investigation does not give the scientist any way a solid empiric comprehension of the being of the tree nor of its overall dimension of life symbol. They do not interrogate about the possibility of a creation power, or a designing intelligence that may have brought the tree into existence.

They leave this to religion, to metaphysics and to philosophy. But is not their investigation short of reality? Is it not bereft of knowledge of what is most important namely of its origin and how come the tree came about into being. Why should scientists limit themselves only to the how of the structure and function and not to the ultimate questions of its existence?

After all their knowledge is lacking in the essence and nature of the object under investigation. Is it not? But scientists are satisfied with their laboratory analysis and conclusions. Whether a scientist sees a creating God behind the tree or not is not the concern of science itself. This is why so many scientists are limited to their fields of study.

Most are blind and deaf to ultimate questions. A scientist believes in what he sees. If he does not see God in the tree he does not believe in God. God, not being subject to laboratory analysis, chemical or biological, is rejected hence by the scientists.

It is when we bypass science and consider science as one step in an overall outlook that we see the shortcomings of science. It is when we consider the tree in its ultimate questions that require simple answers that we become aware of its dimensions, extra-scientific, but real.

It is when we bypass science and look the tree in the light of ultimate knowledge that the tree becomes vital and principle in our outlook. It is when we examine the tree in all its experience dimensions, whether physical, mental, aesthetic, spiritual or sensual.

The scientist is limited by his science to the physical part and not to the other parts of experience that are, if not equally important, then more important and more comprehensive. This is why we claim that science is limited to one phenomena of an object or a thing. But man is an overall being that needs explanations not only of the how but essentially of the why.

Science, being limited to one aspect of an object, is short of explaining ultimate knowledge of the object itself. This where science stops functioning and becomes sterile and where metaphysics takes over the floor for offering explanations and interrogating into the reality of an object, be it a tree, a human, an animal or a star, a galaxy or the whole universe.

We, humans, have a natural and insatiable curiosity to know about everything, is it not our role of being humans in this universe to find everything about our universe?

Why should we be limited to science, itself being limited?

POST COMMENT

Top 5 Misconceptions About Technology We Have A Brief Overview of the Information Technology Infrastructure Library High Technology Apple Mac Pro MB871LL/A PC Finger print scanner Verification which will is the word for almost any technology Stress - 5 Techniques For Reducing Stress For Retail Staff Effective Knee Replacement Techniques For Joint Pain Relief LED Light Technology fast catching up with CFLs? Lead generation techniques Readers Beware! Discover The Truth About Genewize Life Sciences That May Blow Your Mind HTC 7 Mozart Contract- Experience technology at its best The Lightening Fast Pace Of Technology Advancements Technology Has Made It Easy to Get Fast Personal Loans What is 4G Technology and How it Works?