In an age of
growing scientism, we often find that many atheists won’t believe in something
unless it can be scientifically confirmed. This should be called to attention
because if things cannot be evidentially proven by science, doesn’t that mean
God is out of the question? Since there
is no test that we can run or satellite we can send out to locate God, is the
possibility of God impossible since it cannot be proven empirically by science
that there is a God? In addition to
asking whether we should believe in God despite there not being 100% empirical evidence proving
that God does exist, we should also inquire as to whether or not this is a wise
way to approach any problem. Should we solely rely upon the results of
science in order for our senses to allow for potential theistic considerations? These are many questions that should be
looked at more closely and thoughtfully considered before placing too many of
our eggs in the science basket.
Please, don’t
misunderstand me. I love science. It has validated the claims theists have been
making for hundreds of years. However, is
it still rational to place stock in God despite science not being able to
empirically prove there is an existent God?
And, are there things science is incapable of proving? The answer to both of those questions is
YES.
In the above
video, we see that Dr. William Lane Craig lists off five things science cannot
prove but we are all rational to accept.
I’ve listed the five things science cannot prove and included an example:
1.
Logical
and mathematical truths (science presupposes logic and math)
2.
Metaphysical
truths (there are minds other than my own, the external world is real, the past
wasn’t created 5 minutes ago with the appearance of age)
3.
Ethical
beliefs about statements of value (Whether the Nazi scientists in Germany did anything
evil as opposed to doing anything good)
4.
Aesthetic
judgments (beautiful vs. ugly)
5.
Science
cannot be justified by the scientific method1
Notice that
many people who make the claim that science is all there is and say that science
is the only reliable vehicle for confirming anything about life often discredit
the usage of philosophy. You often hear
prominent atheists like Richard Dawkins, Peter Atkins, and Lawrence Krauss
discount the importance of philosophy simply because they have anointed science
with supreme kingship over all other methods of data retrieval and sincerely
believe that science can prove everything.
In fact, they’ve gone so far as to declare that it isn’t a fact unless
it can be scientifically proven.
To look at
only one example of how science fails to answer every single question we can look
to the moral argument. As said in the
third objection posed by Dr. Craig, science cannot determine what is and is not
moral. As prominent atheist Sam Harris
has successfully shown in his book, “The Moral Landscape”, you may only
scientifically prove what helps organisms flourish and not how their morals are
founded in a sense of objective moral right and wrong2.
In
conclusion, scientism fails to view the entire picture. In partaking in a worldview that only allows scientific
findings, you are willingly removing yourself from important philosophical
conclusions which may have theistic implications.
It is safe to say that God is still a rational conclusion despite the
scientific evidence not showing that God is empirically true. However, there are no absolutes in life. The best we can do is to objectively view the
evidence that we have accessible to us, scientific and non-scientific. Needless to say, science has brought theists
large amounts of credibility with the discovery of the big bang, recognition of
the fine-tuning of the universe, identifying the complexity contained within
our DNA, and our vast understanding of biology, geology, astronomy, and
cosmology. While science is a tool that
has granted us insight into God, it shouldn’t be viewed as though it is the
only method of insight and nor should it be treated as a monopoly on information
as many atheists claim that it is.
Notes
1 William Lane Craig vs. Peter
Atkins debate (April 1998 in Atlanta, GA)
2 William Lane Craig vs. Sam Harris debate on “Is the Foundation of Morality Natural or Supernatural?”
at Notre Dame University on April 2011
