Scott Aaronson blew my mind again:
The point of view he attacks can best be exposed by (his) example:
How does a toaster work?
By converting electrical energy into heat.
But what is electricity?
The movement of electrons through a wire.
But what are electrons?
Fundamental particles with spin 1/2, negative charge, mass of 10-27 grams…
But why do particles exist? Why does anything exist?
Well, those are excellent and profound questions, and you see…
Aha! Aha! So science doesn’t have all the answers! Ultimately, then, science is just another form of faith!
Dr. Aaronson goes on to throughly debunk the idea that science needs to have “all the answers” to be epistemologically valid. (It’s good stuff; you should read it.)
Of course, even if science doesn’t have all the answers, the answers (or approximations of answers) it has are pretty useful for things like curing diseases and building bridges.
0 Responses to “All or nothing?”