What science does not do (Agnosticism)

by Balance_Maintained , U.S.A., Tuesday, December 21, 2010, 06:43 (4868 days ago) @ xeno6696

In the English language there are only six basic questioning words: Who, What, When, Where, Why, and How. Any question is essentially a subcategory of one of these 6 that is being applied to a specific criterion. While each of the sciences focuses on a specific one of these questions, they are all interconnected in a completely inseparable way, each leading to the other in a never ending circle. And it is only with the application of all 6 questions that one can get a complete picture. I am not so certain why this is not obvious Xeno, nor way I trying to be misleading or offensive, but the idea that there can be more than superficial separatism between any branch of science, or even between sciences, religion, and philosophy, is, to my way of thinking, absurd. For example, if a historian says that Egyptians built the Pyramids, and left it at that, we wouldn't know anything more than what we knew a moment before. It is not until the carbon dating, the linguistic translations, the mathematical analysis, the religious and philosophical implications, the chemical/mechanical requirements for construction, and any other related questions have all been answered and AGREE that we can say that we really know anything about the Pyramids at all. (And while there is much more involved than this simplistic example, it is early, and I do not have the time nor patience this morning.)I think a much more clear example would be a historical look at exactly where the disciplines of the various sciences and philosophy had their origins, i.e. Religion. They all come from the same womb, so to speak, and they are all inextricably bound together.