I have blogged a few
times about the differences between science and philosophy. I was
educated and trained as a scientist, and have found it a struggle to
comprehend the philosopher's way of thinking. Since retiring to the
country to follow a simpler life, I no longer professionally practice
science, so it's given me an opportunity to turn to philosophy to
work at trying to grasp some of its concepts. It ain't been easy!
It's like moving to another country as an adult—after your inherent
language-learning skills have drastically declined from when you were
two years old—and struggling with a very different language in a
very different culture. But thanks to several online courses in
philosophy, I'm beginning to be a bit conversant with it.
Just as a little
background (and to remind myself of the contrast), here are the
dictionary definitions of the two disciplines:
- Science: “the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the natural world, through observation and experiment” Root meaning: “to know.”
- Philosophy: “the study of the fundamental nature of knowledge, reality, and existence.” Root meaning: “love of wisdom.”
So science is an
activity, while philosophy is a study. Science is an
objective examination of the natural world (which includes
humans), while philosophy is a subjective examination of what
we humans know or can come to know. While the ancient thinkers
believed that we can arrive at truth and knowledge through sheer
reasoning, science conducts experiments to develop knowledge. The
difference is sort of like the study of the properties of the
external world (science) versus the study of the internal world or of
our mind's ability to grasp the external world (philosophy).
While today's science is
partitioned into many disciplines, philosophy has also grown to be
categorized into several branches. One of my online courses defined
four subdisciplines in philosophy:
- Metaphysics—What is there? What's it like?
- Epistemology—What can we know? How do we know?
- Value theory—What's good/bad? How can we be good/bad?
- Logic—Which links it all together. (I quickly become swamped when reading logic. It's yet beyond me.)
When we delve into these
four branches, we find ourselves facing moral, aesthetic, and value
questions. We get into questions of what we should do, and
what is right or wrong.
Science, on the other
hand, is amoral (not immoral, as some people would say)—it
is by and large unconcerned with the rightness or wrongness of what
it studies. Thus, for example, many scientists engaged in the
development of the atomic bomb in World War II, with little moral
examination. That is not to say that scientists ignored the moral
questions. For example, even though he had a hand in initiating the
US's atomic bomb program, Einstein later came to regret his role. The
point is that science does not include moral evaluations as part of
its activities. That's philosophy's business.
I find it interesting how
differently many religions approach and interpret these scientific
and philosophical questions about the nature of the world and the
nature of human knowledge. Religions have a very different
perspective. Yes, humans can reason, religions say, but truth comes
from the gods, or the one God. Thus, truth (as well as morality and
values) is found in scripture or possibly through mystical insight,
but not through human reasoning.
This religious
perspective is often taken to an extreme by religious
fundamentalists, who contend that everything known or worth
knowing can be found in scripture. This approach does not really seek
understanding through the gradual acquisition of knowledge, but by
locating finality (fixed and complete answers) in scripture. This
difference is a source of most of the conflict between religion and
the disciplines of science and philosophy. This conflict is largely
absent, however, with nonfundamentalist religious people—people who
may revere scripture, but do not contend that it is the sole
repository of knowledge and wisdom.
With every online course
I take, my appreciation for both science and philosophy grows. I also
gain better understanding of the basis of conflict between how these
two cognitive ways of looking at reality clash with religious
fundamentalism—and realize that there need not be conflict with all
religious belief.
No comments:
Post a Comment