A lot of people think that science has proven that the material world is all that exists – no God, no angels, and no souls. The problem is that science can never be used to justify the belief that the material world is all that exists (materialism, naturalism). Science is a tool that examines the workings of the physical world. Of course, if the material world is the only thing your tool examines, it is the only thing your tool will see. But it doesn’t follow that what your tool examines is all there is to examine. Edward Feser compares science to a metal detector. It would not follow that since the metal detector only finds metal objects in the ground there are no treasure maps buried as well. A metal detector is not capable of finding paper. It is only geared toward finding metal objects. Its success in finding what it is geared to find – metal objects – in no way serves as evidence that non-metal objects do not exist. Likewise, the success of science in discovering the workings of the physical world in no way serves as evidence that there is no spiritual world.
To determine whether or not there is more to reality than physical stuff, we must look to disciplines other than science, such as philosophy and theology. Only philosophy and theology are equipped to tell us whether non-material entities such as numbers, propositions, God, angels, or souls exist.
To think that the success of science proves there is no God is naïve. Not only does it fail to grasp the purpose and boundaries of science, but it also displays the hubris (or ignorance) of thinking that science is the only source of knowledge.
See also:
- Science cannot explain anything
- Science Cannot Prove the Universe is Eternal
- Science Cannot Identify Uncaused Entities
- God-of-the-Gaps, or Science-of-the-Gaps?: Science Cannot Eliminate God
- The kalam cosmological argument is impervious to scientific refutation
Thinking to Believe 
April 16, 2014 at 8:59 am
Reblogged this on paarsurrey and commented:
Paarsurrey says:
You have made good points. I appreciate most contents of your post.
Thanks and regards.
LikeLike
April 16, 2014 at 10:57 am
Science has proven that all there exists is materialism and that some materialism radiates invisible effects such as magnetism and radioactivity but science can demonstrate both. Religion on the other hand has promoted the spiritual world of the supernatual as factual and yet for the last ten thousand centuries cannot demonstrate anything to support their belief except through magic tricks of deception.
Philiosophy and Theology have expertise in the unknowable for neither discipline can demonstrate anything more. After years and years and thousands of years of speculating and reasoning at the end of the day all they have contributed is a belief that supports the unknowlable and their conclusions remain unknowable still. There has not been one iota of progress in the world of the supernaturalism that demonstrates otherwise.
You mention science and a metal detector but science does have, at least, a Metal Detector, a Magnetic Detector and a Geiger Counter but does Philosophy and Theology even come close to demonstrating their belief with a Supernatural Detector or a Spirit Counter?
I rest my case.
LikeLike
April 16, 2014 at 1:55 pm
SonofMan,
Just contradicting a conclusion is not the same as rebutting it. Tell me, how can a discipline that is only equipped to study the physical realm tell us anything about the existence of non-physical reality? Non-physical reality is not within the purview of the scientific discipline, and thus it cannot comment on non-physical reality. Any scientist who makes pronouncements about metaphysical issues has left his discipline.
Jason
LikeLike
April 16, 2014 at 4:42 pm
“The problem is that science can never be used to justify the belief that the material world is all that exists (materialism, naturalism). Science is a tool that examines the workings of the physical world.”
Partially true, Jason. Science is literally a system of knowledge devoted to finding out truths of the only thing responsible for our existence….a (so-far)completely Natural universe. If it ever finds evidence for the “Spiritual,” it will then acknowledge it as theory, just like everything else in existence.
Until then it is relegated to fantasy, and symptoms of emotional behavior.
“Likewise, the success of science in discovering the workings of the physical world in no way serves as evidence that there is no spiritual world.”
And what would serve as evidence of a “spiritual world?” An actual “spirit” would provide this needed evidence for science to give acceptance to this “story.” So far, there hasn’t been any of this “evidence appearing as “evidence”……anywhere, except in the emotionally-biased beliefs of human beings.
“The simplest answer is usually the correct answer.” Why build a convoluted answer to the important question of “Where did we come from?” This is strictly an emotionally-wrought “jump to conclusions” that is only rooted in mankind’s fearful, guilty, and deeply emotional past.
This is pure “shooting from the hip” simply because “I feel its so!”
One other small problem with the possibility of discovering a “God-Creator-Spirit.”
If science were to ever find proof of this “Creator,” it would mean that He wasn’t sufficiently Super-Natural to keep hidden from the prying eyes of mankind.
I mean, if God truly exists, and He WANTED to be discovered, I would think that He would’ve made His presence very well known to science a while ago, they being the main body of knowledge for mankind.
So, the fact that science so far has found no “smoking gun” pointing to a God’s presence, means that as far as we know, there is no “Spirit,” and no “God.”
I think that this is only the carrying-on of a tradition of ridiculousness which serves the insecure nature of those who’ve never unbiasedly explored their reason and logic….but only their insecurities, thus making a non-existing “God” responsible for their security.
LikeLike
April 16, 2014 at 5:21 pm
Jason:
What I have challenged you with, is not whether the materlalism of science proves anything other than materlalism but the opportunity for you to put forth your Supernatural Detector. If you cannot put forth your Detector that does not necessarily prove Supernatural’s non existence; it simply proves that after ten thousand centuries of human existence there has never been one single iota of proof for your belief system. So it seems to me that the onus is on you to come up with your idea of immaterialism or spirit machine or some other way to convert the spirituality into materlistic reality that we can see; like, electricity can be converted to heat, and heat to electricity, the force of water over the dam that spins the generator, that converts the energy into the electric grid that powers a mulitude of useful human inventions. A simple generator on the wheel of a bicycle will power the light to see where you are going at night time.
LikeLike
April 17, 2014 at 5:25 am
@Beingreal & sonofman.
Both of you (from the gist of your comments) argue that “science is the only method of knowing truth”
The problem of course, is that this is modernism, which has been shown years ago (by philosophy no less) that it is a self-refuring system since the above statement cannot be proven by science and is therefore false by its own definition!!
(Observable) Science is used to see causes and effects between material objects and so does not even consider the immaterial realms. The fact that it uses non-material objects/constructs (mathematics) to do so goes even further to demonstrate why modernism (materialism & naturalism) is not “all there is”.
Put it another way. IF God existed, science would deny the fact to begin with as it is after a natural explanation – and when one is not readily available (eg first cause), many revert to the science of the gaps meme!!
LikeLike
April 17, 2014 at 8:27 am
scottspeig:
You can’t argue for supernaturalism by arguing against materialism and naturalism. Although used as a perjorative in religious circles “modernism”. as you call it, is not a dirty word.
“Science would deny the fact if God existed”. That’s your defeatist attitude that shows you already lost the argument but it still does not give your argument validity.
You don’t have to prove that God exists which even your own statement has to be predicated by the word “if”: ……..”If God exists”……..all you have to do is prove that the supernatural exists; I mean that’d be a start, but you can’t even produce a Spectermeter.
Hollywood in its own facetious way uses infra-red technology, supersensitive sound meters, hide speed cameras and then talk to the spirits: “Don’t be afraid, we’re not here to hurt you, just give us a sign, show us that you understand”; then some vague shadow seems to appear for a nanosecond and the rest of the show is spent anaylizing the shadow and for some reason this seems to prove to a lot of people that the paranormal exists; movies and tv series are as much a discredit to the supernatural by demonstrating the ludicrous imaginings we can conjure up.
I have said this a number of times already but it just cannot sink into a mind bent on delusion determined not to accept reality; so I’ll say it again, even the bible shows that the supernatural is a mere creation of the human mind in the story of Moses when God tells Moses to show Pharaoh a “miracle” to prove the power of the Hebrew God by performing magic tricks; in other words, by deception which is the pillar of religion.
LikeLike
April 17, 2014 at 8:35 am
By the way, Science doesn’t justify materialism; science never created materialism…Materialism exists and science attempts to explain it: science is the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behaviour of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment.
LikeLike
April 17, 2014 at 10:53 am
“Science is used to see causes and effects between MATERIAL OBJECTS and so does not even consider the immaterial realms.”
Not entirely true, Jason. For quite a few years science has been detecting, observing, and postulating inductive, and deductive theory on incorporeal energies in the field of Quantum Physics. Vacuum fluctuations, virtual particles, and the like.
The philosophy of Modernism is precisely that….a philosophy, the study of knowledge. Right or wrong, most of science’s philosophical standards have promoted conclusions that have proved to be quite viable. Workable theories have sufficiently explained most of what is uncovered.
How on Earth would a religion present verifiable evidence of a personal God without a scientific method? “I feel that there is a God” isn’t an acceptable answer.
Maybe through their only tenet, human emotion. As you well may know, this human trait has been shown to vary greatly from person to person, and also from time to time.
When was the last time that you used only your emotions to rule over your personal finances?
It would be like a trip to a Las Vegas casino without balancing your emotions against your reasonable side.
LikeLike
September 14, 2014 at 4:51 pm
How do you get knowledge, if not from empirical confirmation? You use your brain to think (unless you would like to contest this claim). Indeed, if you define science as “the process of gathering empirical, observable evidence and interpreting it”, then I find it difficult to see how we could get knowledge from anything *other* than science!
LikeLike
September 14, 2014 at 7:45 pm
The bible calls magic tricks “miracles”.
“God speaking” was:
when men of old wanted to communicate to God or hear communication from God about what they should do, they went to a Prophet or Imam, priest, preacher, pope, someone who claimed to have mediation powers to the Almighty and that was the accepted mode of communication.
An Elder in the “CHURCH” Sanctuary who claimed to speak/hear messages tp/from God, would tell the ruler, the pharoah, the wise man or whoever had the “connections” to know the ropes; then, what God said or warned or advised that was what they were supposed to do. Naturally much of this communication followed certain rituals: sacrificing pigeons or lambs or calves, fruits, corn, milk, flour, produce “sacrificing” being another word for renumeration, reward or payment for the mediator’s sustenance as demanded by God.
Consulting with God was like going to a catholic confessional for absolution and making an offering in the collection plate; or, like buying indulgences for sin forgiveness, for various fees of course.
In Christian tradition, an indulgence has been something a person could acquire as part of an effort to eliminate or lessen temporal punishments for their sins. The sale of indulgences was one of the things which incited Martin Luther to begin his efforts at reformation.
An indulgence is basically a “get out of sin” card – but not for free because you have to pay for it with cash. Indulgences could be purchased either for oneself or on behalf of others, especially the deceased. Many believed that souls caught in purgatory could get to heave quicker if indulgences were purchased, and this placed a great deal of pressure on people.
This ritualism of God said this or God say that or the Lord says …etc …etc …etc., was the way the world of religion payed wages to its staff, religion’s protocol for making money or filling the store for payment for the messages sent or received from God.
Supernaturalism was purely man’s religious way to communicate the caricature concepts they created, Gods, Devils, Angels, Demons. Clergy perpetuates the hoaxes and Hollywood capitalizes on them, both make as much money as possible from the deceit through the Luciferous, Ludicrous Belief System or Religion.
Have a Nice Eternity all you believers.
footnote: All of the above is provable with scriptural verses from the very Bible few people can understand because of the continued obfuscation of by falsehoods.
My mission is to retrieve fools from their folly.
LikeLike