Session #31 - Science, NOMA and the Limits of Knowledge

“The idea that we live in a universe without meaning is a difficult one to accept.”
― Richard Dawkins

“Science can tell us how the heavens go, but not why we are here.”
― Stephen Jay Gould

Session in english! Also available on consciouspass.com for Karma Points.

Science has transformed the world. It has allowed us to predict nature, cure diseases, build technologies, and understand ourselves better than any previous civilization.
But a question remains:

Are there limits to where science cannot reach? Should there be limits to science? What happens when science gets in other territories like culture, morals or values?

• The scientific naturalist view: reality is ultimately explained through physical processes.
• NOMA (Non Overlapping Magisteria) or the idea that science and religion answer different kinds of questions.
• Critiques of scientism: the belief that science is the only valid way of knowing.

Thinkers like Richard Dawkins, Stephen Jay Gould, and Mary Midgley approach these questions from very different directions.

You do NOT need to have read any of the books.

Introduction of guests (15 minutes)
We start with a short introduction of the topic and of the guests

• Which main driver do you think has the most influence on the outcome for a nation?

Questions (1 hour and 45 minutes)

1. What meaningful things are there that science will never be able to explain?
2. If a belief cannot be falsified, does that make it irrational?
3. If science explains how something happens, does it also explain why it matters?
4. Should we trust science because it is useful, or because it is true?
5. Evolution can explain why humans developed morality, would that make morality less real?
6. If the universe has no built-in meaning, can human-created meaning be just as real?
7. Would a world with perfect happiness but no truth be better than a world with suffering but genuine knowledge?
8. Is religion answering different questions than science, or are they competing?
9. If religions disappeared tomorrow, would humanity lose something important?
10. If a religious belief produces good consequences but is scientifically unprovable, should we keep it?
11. Is believing only what can be scientifically proven itself a belief that science cannot prove?
12. Can religion remain in a “separate domain” if it makes claims about reality (miracles, creation, afterlife)?
13. If science explains how humans came to believe in God, does that undermine the religious belief itself?
14. If only scientifically verifiable statements are meaningful, is that rule itself meaningful or scientifically provable?
15. Problem of induction: If something has always worked in the past, is that a good reason to trust it will work in the future—or just a habit of thinking?
16. Problem of uniformity: Why do we trust that a star 10 billion light-years away follows the same rules as experiments on Earth?

***

RSVP: Please confirm your attendance here on Meetup OR consciouspass.com (get Karma Points for assisting!) In both cases, in case you cannot come, please yield your space to another person in the waiting list.
We are testing a different days and a different places. This is a tea place so you are encourage to try some tea.