Quote:
Originally Posted by tore
I think we do and I could explain why - and have probably done so many times here in the past as similar topics have sprung up over the years .. but I don't think you'd buy it! 
edit :
I often feel like people will accept f.ex quantum mechanics helping us make orbiting satellites or computers and they'll accept that one can use a knowledge of chemistry to synthesize various substances for example. But, if you use disciplines like physics, chemistry and biology to explain why we're here, you're suddenly touching ground where people get spiritual and stuff and then they suddenly don't like explanations that seem "factual" anymore.
Or, possibly, they don't understand them when they hear them. |
While I think you can make a "working hypothesis" based on science, there are still limitations to its application. The problem with science in relation to philosophy is that science won't say we know anything until we have hard evidence pointing to whatever it is we are curious about. While you and I could probably go back and forth on very specific details and how that relates to life in the bigger picture, it still doesn't answer a lot of the philosophical questions people have. One day, maybe will be have advanced science enough to be able to provide these answers, but for now there is a limit. This is why people aren't satisfied with a scientific answer when they are asking a philosophical question.