Can someone explain to me the problems with science?

[Dylan Page]

I am very interested in pursuing enlightenment but I’m really having trouble fully locking down science and math as incapable of discovering truth. So many people that surround me believe this and I just want to be able to confidently say that it isn’t the answer. If anyone can deliver the TKO, please do so here. 

Edited June 18, 2019 by Dylan Page

[Preetom]

Go ask scientists and mathematicians to explain to you the problems/limits of science.

See what sort of typical responses you get

 

Edited June 18, 2019 by Preetom

[Dylan Page]

Most of them don’t think about it. @Preetom

[Preetom]

Just now, Dylan Page said:

Most of them don’t think about it. @Preetom

Exactly!

That alone should be enough to create doubt inside you regarding the depth, honesty and thus possibility of serious errors due to inadvertence in any particular field.

[Rilles]

1. Most of them are dogmatic and close-minded about things that dont fall into the science category, I read yesterday for example that Philosophy is not considered a Science, thats absolutely insane, Philosophy is one of the most important tools to discover what reality is

2. They think that all the answers to reality can be found outside in the ”objective” world and that human experience is not scientific (see the contradiction?)

3.They worship the brain as the benchmark for all thats true or false ”Oh LSD is just a brain-trip, it isnt ”real” (another contradiction)

 

But Science will grow much better in the future, its already on the way, were moving away from the materialist Dawkins and Hitchens type of thinking into more interesting Stage Green/Yellow terrority

 

If Science integrated Heart, Soul and Open-Minded interest in ALL types of Experience it could change the entire planet radically

Edited June 18, 2019 by Rilles

[Preetom]

The problem of science is that they are not scientific, rigorous and scrupulously logical enough!

If a knowledge is rigorous and honest enough, when knowledge is turned on knowledge itself, knowledge gets transcended.

The way usually scientists do science and acquire knowledge for decades and yet never bother to question the mechanism of knowledge itself, is similar to the deluded fool who spends the dollars left by his parents without ever understanding the concept of value or worth in the first place.

[Conrad]

Science aka the Matrix.  The real science is within. Truth and reality is within. God is within.

[Leo Gura]

The epistemology and metaphysics of science is a very complex topic. There is no silver bullet against science. The devil is all in the details. Many books could and have be written about it.

The core problem is that science does not question its own foundations.

How do you know science is capable of accessing Absolute Truth? After all, this has never been demonstrated by science. And how would you demonstrate it anyway? By using science? Do you see how that begs the question? If science is incomplete or flawed then you cannot use science to validated science. You need a meta science. And a meta meta science, and so on to infinity.

Science actually has no foundation because reality is infinite.

The ancient Greek skeptics showed 2000 years ago why no human knowledge is possible. But the scientists ignored them. And they are in denial about it to this day.

You cannot convince a scientist that science is a dream. Because scientists hold science as a dogma. Like religious people. You will never convince a Muslim that his idea of Allah is a dream. Because his mind is not open to such a possibility. He is not interested in searching for Truth because he thinks he's already found it. 

[CreamCat]

1 minute ago, Leo Gura said:

why no human knowledge is possible

I do not understand what this means. I possess human knowledge.

[Leo Gura]

10 minutes ago, CreamCat said:

I do not understand what this means. I possess human knowledge.

All of your knowledge is groundless, relative, and ultimately delusional.

You do not actually know what anything is.

Read what the ancient skeptics wrote. Read Outlines Of Pyrrhonism.

[Salvijus]

"Because science can only interpret things. It cannot know the nature of what it is. Science is just an interpretstion of limited data that you have gathered. " 

Full talk. 

 

Edited June 18, 2019 by Salvijus

[Leo Gura]

Science is a conceptual, symbolic, relativistic, and dualistic enterprise. It cannot overcome this ever because all language is dualistic amd science cannot be done without language. Try it.

Beyond language is mysticism.

[Pouya]

@Leo Gura Can deep nondual work be a science without language?

 

[Leo Gura]

@Pouya That is called mysticism.

[ahmad ibdah]

@Leo Gura you gotta be doing an episode aboute language soon , you mention it alot!.

[Nahm]

@Dylan Page You’re question derives from what you are aware of, but the answer is what you are, what is aware. Looking at science to see Truth is like looking at a photograph while claiming you’re trying to see the room. Maybe start with your hand. Notice “hand” is a word you learned, a paper thin veil covering the truth of what that actually is. 

[Truth Addict]

@Dylan Page

Science is not only good. It's great.

I love science and I appreciate the efforts that people had put throughout history to deliver it to us. Blood had literally been spilled for us to enjoy the benefits of science today.

It isn't the truth. Of course, as everything else.

Instead of trying to convince your friends that science is not the truth, try to undermine their need to consider it truth. Perhaps Actualized.org is the one of the greatest tools for that.

Try to introduce more relativity and doubt to the foundations of science. That can certainly deconstruct the belief that science is the answer.

[RendHeaven]

8 hours ago, CreamCat said:

I do not understand what this means. I possess human knowledge.

Name one "piece of knowledge" you think you know  Let's test it together.

[CreamCat]

3 hours ago, RendHeaven said:

Name one "piece of knowledge" you think you know  Let's test it together.

1+1=2

[abrakamowse]

4 minutes ago, CreamCat said:

1+1=2

1+1 = 1

Not one and not two