If that is the case, where should a person start a serious investigation into religion amidst all the complexity? Where should a person begin? All are necessary, but no single approach by itself is sufficient. But none of these individually can tell us everything. Science, and each of the other kinds of truths, will have something to say about God. This shouldn’t be too surprising, considering that if God truly does exist, God is in a different category from every created thing that we can grasp and study under a microscope: God, unlike every created thing, is in the “uncreated things” category.
![dialogue on good evil and the existence of god giraffe dialogue on good evil and the existence of god giraffe](https://i1.wp.com/www.slaphappylarry.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/why-so-many-animals-picture-books.jpg)
Rigidly applying the same methodology used for studying mundane things would be deficient when considering divine things.
![dialogue on good evil and the existence of god giraffe dialogue on good evil and the existence of god giraffe](https://www.epa.eu/sites/epa/files/styles/max_width_600px/public/2020-03/w_02366955.jpg)
It is, in a sense, a different kind of knowing, not ignorant of the other kinds of truths, but requiring that they be studied together carefully. It is comprised of science, logic, philosophy, history, ethics, and experience all mixed together. It may have something to do with a fact hinted at earlier: Religious truth is multifaceted. Why then does science often seem so straightforward and uncontroversial, whereas religion can be so difficult and contentious? But the overlap tends to be rather small in any case, true science and true religion, because they both aim to describe reality, can never be in conflict. It does have a certain amount of overlap with science, when religion makes explicit claims about scientific fact, and when science makes explicit claims about religion. That’s because it is comprised of all of the other kinds of truth mentioned above mixed together: Religious truth.
![dialogue on good evil and the existence of god giraffe dialogue on good evil and the existence of god giraffe](https://lopasassociation.weebly.com/uploads/1/2/7/2/127285181/185887037.png)
There is one other kind of truth that cannot be proven or disproven by science. Religious truth is a different kind of knowing To try to do so would be like trying to ascertain whether a banana is tasty by sticking it in your ear and listening to it it’s simply the wrong method! There are more intellectual tools available to us than just science, and as the old saying goes, when all you’ve got is a hammer, everything begins to look like a nail!įor the kinds of truth listed above, science is not deficient in any way it’s just not the right way to find those particular kinds of truth. However, it would be a mistake to expect it to be able to test everything. None of this is meant to criticize science! There’s nothing wrong with the scientific method for testing the kinds of things it was meant to test. There is no scientific test that can confirm a lifetime of experience of knowing a person. When asked why so-and-so loves you, you may cite precedent (times when their behavior demonstrates their love for you), but this is a particular type of historical truth. We could have an investigation if we wanted to confirm that he did actually win, but the method for proving historical truth is different from testing scientific truths since historical truths are by nature non-repeatable.ĥ) Experiential Truth: Science cannot prove that your spouse loves you. There is no scientific test we could perform to prove it. Science can describe how the natural world is, but moral truth carries an “oughtness” (how things should be) that goes beyond what merely is.ģ) Logical Truth: Consider the statement, “Science is the only way to really know truth.” How could you prove that statement by science? It is actually self-refuting because there is no scientific test you could use to prove that it is true! Science cannot prove logic to be true because it assumes and requires logic in order for it to work.Ĥ) Historical Truth: Science cannot prove that Barack Obama won the 2008 United States presidential election.
![dialogue on good evil and the existence of god giraffe dialogue on good evil and the existence of god giraffe](https://anotheratheistsite.files.wordpress.com/2016/01/good-evil.jpg)
While it is possible to demonstrate, for example, that there are negative physical or psychological effects of rape, there is no scientific test that can prove it is evil. However, it’s still rational to believe that our memories are true and that the world is real.Ģ) Moral Truth: Science cannot prove that rape is evil.
#DIALOGUE ON GOOD EVIL AND THE EXISTENCE OF GOD GIRAFFE MOVIE#
Here are five categories of truth that cannot be proven using the scientific method:ġ) Existential Truth: Science cannot prove that you aren’t merely a brain in a jar being manipulated to think this is all actually happening (think of something like in the movie “The Matrix”.) It also cannot prove that the world wasn’t created 5 minutes ago with the appearance of age (and with fake memories in your head, and half-digested food in your stomach, etc.). However, there are actually many things that science cannot prove. We should be deeply grateful for the hard work of scientists who dedicate their lives to loyal study of this discipline and the advantages scientific advances grant us.ĭue to its success, there is often a tendency to think that science can explain everything. Science has contributed innumerable benefits to human life on planet Earth.