Science Is Usually Wrong

AlchemyYes, science is usually wrong. By wrong, I mean inaccurate. The margin of error may be vanishingly small but it is error nevertheless. Consider that few scientific theories have a shelf-life of more than a couple of centuries before becoming functionally obsolete. It stands to reason that most of our best scientific theories of today will have become equally obsolete within another few hundred years. Certainly science is useful. We would not have modern medicines or complex modern marvels without the materials and technology science provides. But mere usefulness is no proof of the absolute veracity of our current scientific theories. Even in the times of Romans and Egyptians, many seemingly miraculous structures and cures were being implemented with the most archaic and inaccurate scientific theories. Because they seemed to work well enough for the times did not mean they were necessarily correct. No legitimate scientist today would base his work on any of the scientific principles accepted as absolute fact millennia ago. Accuracy is one of the basic cornerstones of the scientific method and since we can assume from experience that no modern scientific theory is completely accurate, all conclusions based on our modern theories must be inherently inaccurate as well.

What does this mean for people of faith? Any scientific “proof” that God does not exist, if found, will eventually become obsolete – perhaps to be supplanted by another equally transient proof and so on. Science is a merely a useful albeit imperfect human tool. Why should we replace our faith in a perfect and eternal God with faith in an imperfect one of our own creation? Whenever new scientific evidence is presented which seemingly contradicts our faith, we must try to remember that faith has a much longer shelf-life than science. On the other hand, we must never attempt to base or even bolster our faith on any scientific evidence or theories. Any faith based on scientific evidence or theories puts science foremost and will constantly be undermined by new discoveries. Attempting scientific proof of God’s existence is foolhardy. Even if temporarily successful to some degree, it’s success will never survive the inevitable proofs to the contrary. Any new believers the original proof may have won will be lost and forever jaded. Any true believers which have in some way incorporated the proof into their belief system will then have a shadow of doubt cast upon their faith. But most importantly, the attempt itself gives credit to the bizarre notion that faith in a scientific proof of God is somehow superior to faith in God directly.

Some suggest science leads them to a better understanding of the mind of God. To me, scientifically analyzing the universe to understand the mind of God seems a bit more akin to analyzing the pigment on a canvas to understand the mind of the painter. Usually, it is better just to step back and appreciate the whole painting with an uncritical mind.

Faith is not scientific nor is it logical. Faith based on logic will be out-reasoned. Faith based on science will become obsolete. Faith is truly only faith when it is based on that which is far greater than any human mind can hope to comprehend but which the human “heart” is intimately familiar.

The truly faithful need no justification for their beliefs. But for the faithless, no justification is sufficient.

This entry was posted in [pseudo]Science, Faith and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.