subject: Science tells you how: Metaphysics tells you why [print this page] Science tells you how: Metaphysics tells you why
Science tells you how: Metaphysics tells you why.
Knowledge of the how is limited to science. Knowledge of why is the domain of metaphysics. To identify an object, science looks at the object, be it an apple, a tree, an animal or a human species (other species of human donkeys and chimpanzees, on two legs, are included) and examines it according to empirical experimental evidence.
Science believes in what it sees, subject to precise verification in the laboratory. When looking at the stars, planets and galaxies, these cannot be reduced to the laboratory size of the scientist, so the scientist has to go into the open universe to examine, analyze and deduce his knowledge.
Whether it is the hypothesis of a big bang or black matter, a DNA genetic structure, or a Max Planck wall, or Einstein's theory of general relativity, coupled with quantum theory, or nano engineering, science shows its clutches and pokes its nose in everything sensible susceptible to scientific proof and evidence.
If there is neither proof nor evidence then science does not interfere and is not interested. It looks into these things with examining eye that does not miss anything visible and utterly evident. It examines the object under examination with meticulous exactitude and leaves nothing to hazard and chance.
The idea of the object, in the mind of the scientist, must be clear, unambiguous, simple and direct, evident and subject to verification by all other scientists, human or otherwise.
Unfortunately, science stops at the frontiers of knowledge. For looking at one aspect of nature, stars, galaxies, the universe and our being (a string-dimension lesser than a flip of a butterfly's wing), but boaster, arrogant man as he is, refuses to go further and inquire of the origin, the presence, the nature, the essence, and the finality of a thing.
But, Einstein was more modest than most scientists, he recognized his own insignificant size compared with what the world presents to him. Confessing his incapacity to go beyond in knowledge, he asserts the mystery of it all: We understand very little about the subtlety of the universe with our feeble minds', he said.
Why should the scientist and his disciples go beyond nature? Is there not enough in nature to wet the appetite of these erudite? These knowledgeable who claim absolute knowledge of their limited science and limited brains? Our world is enough, there is everything in it to keep us preoccupied for thousands of years to come.
After all, man must survive and science is the only tool f survival, before man destroys nature and the world with it- he is not very far away from that though.
Ultimate knowledge does not interest the scientist for there is neither proof nor evidence for it. If the scientist does not answer your question about where did the universe come from, he twists his mouth and smiles. The Idiot!
If you ask him how come we came about, us and some two million animal species, so admirable so distinct and so fascinating, he would take a deep breath and grudgingly say, I don't know.
The donkey! But the donkey has more brains in his tail than all the scientific meteorologists, for by shaking his tail stuck to his bottom he indicates the weather forecast for rain. No scientist with his fully developed brain (of 120 billions of active neurons working simultaneously full-time) can predict for such a forecast.
Unless you know a scientist who does, the donkey remains more knowledgeable. More subtle and admirable, when rain approaches, flies are agitated. Does this not mean that the fly has more knowledge and intelligence in her head than the scientist, with 120 billion neurons?
The scientist never asks the why, always the how. In this he is limited to what he sees and can prove. Thus the question of the why escapes the scientist and is left wide open to the metaphysician.
Metaphysics is not short sighted and limited to the sensible or what nature can offer to the naked eye. It is not limited to the rudimentary tools of the laboratory of the blind scientist.
Metaphysics search for the real. Its domain is the identification of the fundamental. He we part company with science and its limited methods. Induction or deduction are employed in metaphysics, in its own logic in searching for the real, the true real at that.
While the origin of the universe and life, the essence and presence of these and their finalities are closed to science, metaphysics takes over and includes the knowledge provided by science in goes beyond to look for the real in such knowledge namely, what's behind physics.
Thus, if science does not care to identify the need for creation behind the presence of the universe and that God as the creator, for example, metaphysics assert such need for a powerful, all mighty, all intelligence, all knowledgeable planning creator and programmer to bring about the universe.
While science rejects the idea of God. Metaphysics asserts such an idea. Science remain empty handed in explaining the universe, its presence, origin, function and structure while metaphysics recognizes these essentials as reference to God.
There is no more perfect knowledge, looking into the real, than metaphysics. While science is limited to the sensible, metaphysics reaches the intelligible and pries into the real nature of everything containing science and all other knowledge.
Our tool in metaphysics is not limited to what we see and can prove but what we can get to know by the intutiion of our mind and soul.
