Re: [asa] The Purpose of Science and Origins Research

I'd argue there's some merit, some problems, and some risk of
misrepresentation into serious problems in the statement on science.

Science cannot explain everything. It assumes the reality, regularity, and
comprehensibility of the physical world. As it makes these assumptions, it
cannot test them, though the fact that it seems to work well in general
suggests that it is on the right track.

On the other hand, answering the origin of the universe might or might not
be a question science can answer. It depends on what all one includes in
the universe, as well as on just how it was made. Science may eventually
explain the physical origins of the universe, but that should not be equated
with explaining all aspects of reality. The possibility that physics might
one day be able to fully describe the origins and characteristics of the
subatomic particles that make me from some fundamental law of nature gets us
no closer to understanding what I think than does current knowledge of
physics. Also, it is possible that God made the universe in a way that can
be decribed by laws of physics that we can discover, or that He did not.

Identifying science as narrative is easily misrepresented as identifying
science as merely a social construct. Although the choice of problems to
address, the ability to disseminate one's ideas, etc. are all influenced by
social factors, science is also strongly constrained by physical reality.
Ultimately, paradigm shifts occur because enough scientists become convinced
that the new model is a better description of physical reality (or, in some
cases, a better way to analyze physical reality).

-- 
Dr. David Campbell
425 Scientific Collections
University of Alabama
"I think of my happy condition, surrounded by acres of clams"
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.