Science and physical laws (The limitations of science)

by The Reverend Nicholas Dante Rockers , Saturday, February 16, 2008, 04:40 (5911 days ago)

First, I want to say that I'm an agnostic minister (ordained online for the low, low price of $0), so my comments here are not intended to argue in favor of one thing or another. - I have some disagreements about how the scope of science is defined. It certainly expands far outside the physical world. The machinations of the mind, for example, are scientificly studied, and we call that "psychology." Instead, the study of science is "natural things" (that is, naturally existing, not just things that come from Mother Nature). This includes society and culture, things which have no real "physical" existence, but have come about through natural means. There is no verifiable thing in existence that science can not study. Religion tends to exist in the world of the "supernatural" or "extranatural." This also explains why only the poorest of scientists study ghosts or bigfoot. Religious tenents can not be verified to even exist, let alone be studied, so it is outside the realm of science to comment upon. Dawkins is incorrect in his assumptions based on this. Science makes no claims about that which it can not study, and therefore is not atheistic, but it is inherently agnostic in nature.