View Single Post
Jan24-07, 03:33 AM
P: 38
My contention is that if science can't answer why then can you really ask the question? To me, one should only ask why if one knows what one would need to know to know why. For instance, I don't think one should ask if Christianity is true if one has no conception of what it would mean for Christianity to be true.

For Christianity to be true (but still unknowable) God would need to exist, so in this case the unknowability of God's existence provides the unknowability of Christianity's truth.

But if you can't go this far to conceive of what the truth of Christianity would require then I don't think you can ask the question.
If i am getting you. What you are saying is that:

1) Every "why" question need a purpose.

2) If A s existence IFF depend B s existence, then the unknowability of B implies the unknowability of A.

My replies

*) i don t understand what you mean by "the truth of christianity"? What is that mean? In fact, i dont really know what you mean by "a conception" for something to be ture. I have a conception of the dinner i ate? can you tell me the frame of mind i need to have a "conception" that something is "ture"?

1) Not every why need a purpose. Some might be just an emotional impulse. I don t see why we should stop asking. In fact, it is a bit sad you think this way. You are thinking yourself into a box.

2) I don t really see your point. I think it sort of prove my point.

If it is true that science doesn't answer why then perhaps the word 'why' should be done away with, or limited to being used only in reference to reasons that people give for their own actions, or the answers that scientific theories provide.
If so, then you are really limited yourself. It makes no sense to me. Science can only provide genealizations of natural phenonmen, and summerized into a couple of "laws of nature". Perhaps one day, scienctists might come up with one or two equations that sort of describe everything important in our universe. What brings those equations to life? Why the hell would there be a universe for the equations to describe? Why our universe? I don t understand you at all. Your rational is : People should stop asking this question, because it has no answer.

Or if you disagree then come up with a rationalisation about when we may ask why because I don't see that we may ask why without knowing any more about the question including what its truth would require. I surely can agree to this rationalisation: "why questions can only be asked if what is required falls within the domain of science".
We can ask "why" if and only if( the truth it require) science fail to provide a reason.
Science fail to provide reason for 1) existence 2) the laws of nature, 3) cannot explain why the laws have the form that they do. Therefore, the question of "why" can be asked.