Philosophy Now Forum

The scientific approach to philosophy avers that : science is the absolute and only justifiable access to the truth about the world.

This seems quite reasonable to me. There doesn't seem to be any other process which allows the extraction of truth about the real world.

What do you think?

A_Seagull wrote:The scientific approach to philosophy avers that : science is the absolute and only justifiable access to the truth about the world.

This seems quite reasonable to me. There doesn't seem to be any other process which allows the extraction of truth about the real world.

What do you think?

Seriously, who is actually saying that;"science is the absolute and only justifiable access to the truth about the world."

A_Seagull wrote:The scientific approach to philosophy avers that : science is the absolute and only justifiable access to the truth about the world.

This seems quite reasonable to me. There doesn't seem to be any other process which allows the extraction of truth about the real world.

What do you think?

I think it's an overstatement.

If you are speaking of the scientific method versus revelation, then Einstein's and others' famous thought experiments suggest otherwise. If it's science versus logic then, again, there's an issue because logic's detail extends to math, and math is needed to explore things where experiments and observation can't yet go.

Further, what can the scientific method tell me of what it feels like to be you? That sense might be particular and not of much use to anyone else, but it is part of the real world and is the aspect that matters most to each of us.

At first glance I can't think of any other issues. The scientific method is more reliable than others but it obviously has limits.