Feynman on Scientific Method.

Physicist Richard Feynman explains the scientific and unscientific methods of understanding nature.

• Category

  Education

[cjs2964]

Actually, neuroscience has done a fairly good job at explaining dreams, as it develops more it will explain even more. Just because science is yet to explain something doesn't mean its incapable of explaining it. You're arbitrarily setting narrow parameters for science, but in reality you have no idea what limitations it has, if any. As far as god goes; the hypothesis that a god created the universe is a scientific claim therefore science does in fact have something to say about it.

[Mulla Nasrudin]

For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance, he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries.” —Robert Jastrow

[Sagar Sharma]

People like you make me laugh.

Science can't explain this, Science can't explain that.

What do you think Science is ?

It's ever evolving, all the knowledge we have, it's not going to stop. Science does not have any limitations my friend. Your creativity and thinking sure has.

And talking about having the right answers ?

"I can live with doubt, and uncertainty, and not knowing. I think it's much more interesting to live not knowing than to have answers which might be wrong."

- Richard Feynman

[Gustavo Bandeira]

"Science itself exists based on many ASSUMPTIONS that we HOPE are true." - All your arguing is based on the same premise: It's based on ASSUMPTIONS that you HOPE are true. Welcome on board. =)

[cjs2964]

Well I'm really not sure what kind of experiment it would take. Obviously to conclusively determine the existence or lack thereof of any God(s) we would need to have much more knowledge than we currently have. So it is impractical for now and may always be beyond our reach. However whether or not something exists in reality, science in principle could determine, as science is essentially a description of reality. The previous poster was trying to say that the "supernatural" was beyond science.

[europeanbamf]

Right, I get what you're saying.

What I mean is that this the claim of God creating the universe by its nature cannot be proven or disproven by science.

For example, assuming we had whatever technology you deem necessary (within the realm of reason), what kind of experiment could possibly be created that could prove/disprove God creating the universe?

[cjs2964]

What I meant by "scientific claim" is as in an attempt to describe a natural phenomena. Obviously this particular claim is done in an unscientific way however it is a claim of the natural world; the claim being that our cosmos came into existence as a result of a conscience plan. Thus it is in the realm of science in the sense that if the claim is ever disproven or proven it will be science that does it. So I guess it's more of an unscientific attempt at a scientific claim.

[Nick Rat]

class of 10 20 30...brilliant

[Nick Rat]

we can only be sure we are wrong 4:55

[Jade Davies]

22 dislikes... fuckers

[europeanbamf]

A scientific claim is something:

That can be tested.

That can be repeated.

God creating the universe is not a scientific claim. It's untestable and non-repeatable.

Science can't say yes or no with regards to supernatural ideas like the existence of God. Science deals with what is natural.

[lordandprotector]

Richard Feynman destroys the cult of global warming in the first minute. If the predictions of the hypothesis fail to conform to nature, the hypothesis is wrong. non-predictive = non-scientific.