Hi, Clifford Goldstein here.
00:00:21.30\00:00:23.33
Welcome to
"Contending for the faith."
00:00:23.36\00:00:26.27
This is part of a series
00:00:26.30\00:00:27.76
I'm doing called
"Faith in Science"
00:00:27.79\00:00:30.37
and we look at issues
in well faith and science.
00:00:30.40\00:00:35.44
How do we as people of faith
relate to some of the issues
00:00:35.47\00:00:40.57
that science has raised?
00:00:40.60\00:00:42.40
Now as I said in earlier shows
00:00:42.43\00:00:45.31
that, from most
cases there is no problem.
00:00:45.34\00:00:47.87
In fact, I could say for myself
00:00:47.90\00:00:50.32
that science has in many,
many ways affirmed my faith.
00:00:50.35\00:00:56.33
Now there are
cases, important cases
00:00:56.36\00:01:00.23
in which the latest
teachings of science do seem
00:01:00.26\00:01:03.85
to completely
contradict even the simplest
00:01:03.88\00:01:07.54
and most broadest
reading of the Bible.
00:01:07.57\00:01:10.68
Thus, the question
is, how should we even
00:01:10.71\00:01:14.35
as people of faith
intelligently respond
00:01:14.38\00:01:17.94
when things like this happen?
00:01:17.97\00:01:19.78
Now I can stuck
and I stand up here
00:01:19.81\00:01:21.58
and say that I got
the definitive answer,
00:01:21.61\00:01:24.24
I certainly don't.
00:01:24.27\00:01:25.92
But at the same time too,
00:01:25.95\00:01:27.25
I've read in this
and study this a lot
00:01:27.28\00:01:30.34
and I like to present
some background information
00:01:30.37\00:01:34.21
and just some ideas are looking
at this that could help people
00:01:34.24\00:01:37.86
who at times face this conflict
make intelligent choices
00:01:37.89\00:01:42.54
when presented with
some of these challenges.
00:01:42.57\00:01:45.39
I like to help them do
what Apostle Peter said.
00:01:45.42\00:01:49.62
When he said, "But sanctify
the Lord God in your hearts,
00:01:49.65\00:01:53.58
and be ready always to
give an answer to every man
00:01:53.61\00:01:57.52
that asks you a
reason of the hope
00:01:57.55\00:02:00.97
that is in you
with meekness and fear."
00:02:01.00\00:02:05.41
Now again, as I
said, in most cases
00:02:05.44\00:02:09.91
there's really not a problem
when with science in faith
00:02:09.94\00:02:13.72
but sometimes
there is and science
00:02:13.75\00:02:16.52
and the challenges of
science can be very daunting.
00:02:16.55\00:02:20.87
I mean, science is a very
powerful form of knowledge.
00:02:20.90\00:02:25.97
It has opened to us vast new
vistas of knowledge in reality
00:02:26.00\00:02:31.74
that we never could have known
00:02:31.77\00:02:34.31
without the
advent of science, okay.
00:02:34.34\00:02:38.92
But now notice
what I just said to you.
00:02:38.95\00:02:41.46
I said science is a
powerful form of knowledge.
00:02:41.49\00:02:47.61
But what is knowledge?
00:02:47.64\00:02:49.93
You know, I'm gonna
lightly touch on this point
00:02:49.96\00:02:52.32
and perhaps comeback
to it in another program.
00:02:52.35\00:02:55.97
But when you use
the word knowledge,
00:02:56.00\00:02:59.13
what are you implying?
00:02:59.16\00:03:01.24
What must exist
for knowledge to exist?
00:03:01.27\00:03:05.83
Imagine, imagine for a moment,
00:03:05.86\00:03:09.62
imagine that our
universe was once the way--
00:03:09.65\00:03:13.20
well, lot of science tell us,
00:03:13.23\00:03:16.00
imagine that we
lived in a godless,
00:03:16.03\00:03:19.09
lifeless universe, okay.
00:03:19.12\00:03:22.35
Not only no God, not only
no intelligent form at all,
00:03:22.38\00:03:27.23
nothing, no
consciousness, just dead walks
00:03:27.26\00:03:30.27
and a lifeless cosmos
with no Creator at all.
00:03:30.30\00:03:35.75
This is basically
what science tells us
00:03:35.78\00:03:38.93
how our universe started out.
00:03:38.96\00:03:40.84
Now, imagine this
kind of a universe.
00:03:40.87\00:03:44.54
In this universe
could knowledge exists?
00:03:44.57\00:03:50.08
Think about this for a moment.
00:03:50.11\00:03:52.02
In a godless consciousless
universe with nothing existing
00:03:52.05\00:03:57.65
that can think how
can there be knowledge?
00:03:57.68\00:04:01.75
Can there be? Of course not.
00:04:01.78\00:04:03.71
Okay, how could,
there might be dead rocks,
00:04:03.74\00:04:06.74
there might be space,
there might be photons
00:04:06.77\00:04:09.64
and stars and there might be
all the stuff but no knowledge.
00:04:09.67\00:04:14.53
Knowledge, the very
concept of knowledge
00:04:14.56\00:04:18.18
itself demands consciousness,
00:04:18.21\00:04:21.13
it demands a mind
to have that knowledge.
00:04:21.16\00:04:24.96
I mean, knowledge without a mind
00:04:24.99\00:04:27.70
is as impossible as is
thought without a mind.
00:04:27.73\00:04:31.95
For knowledge is
a form of thought
00:04:31.98\00:04:34.74
and you can't have a
thought without a mind.
00:04:34.77\00:04:39.21
Right? Think about it.
00:04:39.24\00:04:42.14
Okay, anyway for knowledge
to exist minds need to exist.
00:04:42.17\00:04:47.58
Thus for human
knowledge well, we as humans
00:04:47.61\00:04:50.03
when we talk about knowledge
00:04:50.06\00:04:51.29
we're talking
about human knowledge.
00:04:51.32\00:04:53.31
For human knowledge
to exist human minds,
00:04:53.34\00:04:56.88
our minds have to
exist because our knowledge--
00:04:56.91\00:05:00.64
anything we know,
anything that we call knowledge
00:05:00.67\00:05:03.84
this exists in our minds.
00:05:03.87\00:05:06.03
And that could include
00:05:06.06\00:05:07.21
well, even our
knowledge of science, right.
00:05:07.24\00:05:09.89
Science is a form of knowledge,
knowledge needs minds,
00:05:09.92\00:05:12.88
human minds means human science.
00:05:12.91\00:05:15.80
I mean-- means, human
science means human minds.
00:05:15.83\00:05:20.31
But I think there is one
thing probably everybody,
00:05:20.34\00:05:23.51
I don't think anybody
is gonna debate me on this,
00:05:23.54\00:05:25.79
but I think there is one
thing we could all agree on
00:05:25.82\00:05:29.59
when it comes
to human knowledge,
00:05:29.62\00:05:31.90
knowledge that we
have in our brains
00:05:31.93\00:05:35.19
and that is one thing.
00:05:35.22\00:05:37.10
It is only subjective right.
00:05:37.13\00:05:40.45
I mean, it's not
subjectivity wired in to us.
00:05:40.48\00:05:44.17
We are
exceedingly subjective beings,
00:05:44.20\00:05:47.59
greatly limited
and what we can know by
00:05:47.62\00:05:49.86
and almost
innumerable number of factors,
00:05:49.89\00:05:53.33
thus anything we know
or anything that we think
00:05:53.36\00:05:56.76
we know, anything
that fact that may be
00:05:56.79\00:05:58.72
the we are even
absolutely positive about,
00:05:58.75\00:06:02.45
I mean, we still
know it only through
00:06:02.48\00:06:07.30
the subjective portals
and filters of our minds.
00:06:07.33\00:06:12.87
We could be a 100% right
00:06:12.90\00:06:15.41
such as often in the
case of formal logic,
00:06:15.44\00:06:18.11
our conclusions must absolutely
follow from our premises,
00:06:18.14\00:06:22.42
but still the whole foundation
of all human knowledge,
00:06:22.45\00:06:27.09
no matter how
correct it might be
00:06:27.12\00:06:29.77
still remains
hopelessly encased, expressed
00:06:29.80\00:06:34.24
and understood through
a subjective perspective
00:06:34.27\00:06:38.59
that is simply
impossible for us,
00:06:38.62\00:06:42.21
any human beings to escape.
00:06:42.24\00:06:46.34
What this means then,
is that all our knowledge
00:06:46.37\00:06:50.38
including,
including don't forget this
00:06:50.41\00:06:53.19
because we often
giving the different idea,
00:06:53.22\00:06:55.55
all our knowledge including
our scientific knowledge
00:06:55.58\00:07:00.65
comes with a certain
amount of subjectivity
00:07:00.68\00:07:04.21
built right in it and we cannot,
00:07:04.24\00:07:07.28
it's impossible
for us to escape it.
00:07:07.31\00:07:12.22
Okay, of course, science
and I said science as well,
00:07:12.25\00:07:18.09
which is why
sometimes-- you ever wonder
00:07:18.12\00:07:20.77
why science sometimes
could be some contradictory.
00:07:20.80\00:07:24.93
I mean, how many
times have you heard
00:07:24.96\00:07:27.11
that such and such an idea
is backed up the latest science?
00:07:27.14\00:07:30.95
We think well, its science
I said before someone says,
00:07:30.98\00:07:34.16
its science that's it.
00:07:34.19\00:07:35.81
Who dare challenge it?
00:07:35.84\00:07:37.31
And that's fine
something is backed up
00:07:37.34\00:07:39.16
by the latest science
except there is one problem,
00:07:39.19\00:07:43.21
20 years later
somebody comes out with science
00:07:43.24\00:07:46.99
something backed up by science
that completely can't predict
00:07:47.02\00:07:50.81
what science
taught 20 years ago.
00:07:50.84\00:07:53.73
Only problem is--
and then you can come on
00:07:53.76\00:07:55.68
somebody comes
along 20 years later
00:07:55.71\00:07:58.10
and says that science is wrong.
00:07:58.13\00:08:01.66
I mean, if this is science
00:08:01.69\00:08:04.09
which has this
kind of leach status
00:08:04.12\00:08:06.50
as a superior form of knowledge,
00:08:06.53\00:08:09.11
how come we find
such conflicting claims.
00:08:09.14\00:08:12.50
I mean, you know,
if when science says
00:08:12.53\00:08:15.86
something to back up
isn't that kind of it
00:08:15.89\00:08:18.65
when somebody has
well, science backs this up,
00:08:18.68\00:08:21.73
who can argue against science?
00:08:21.76\00:08:24.72
Well, you know
the answer is easy.
00:08:24.75\00:08:26.52
You know, who
argues against science?
00:08:26.55\00:08:29.29
Science argues against
science and a lot of times too.
00:08:29.32\00:08:35.06
Let me give you
a recent example,
00:08:35.09\00:08:38.25
the Atlantic Weekly,
January 5, 2014 had an article
00:08:38.28\00:08:44.47
about a best
selling new book telling us,
00:08:44.50\00:08:48.19
listen to this now, telling
us that according to science
00:08:48.22\00:08:52.67
we need as
humans, we need to stop
00:08:52.70\00:08:56.32
eating all grains, all grains.
00:08:56.35\00:08:59.84
We are not talking
just the refined stuff,
00:08:59.87\00:09:02.16
all grains, whole
grains, grains period,
00:09:02.19\00:09:05.78
all the bread, all the grains
00:09:05.81\00:09:07.94
it's because we are told
by science of all sorts of--
00:09:07.97\00:09:12.96
of all sorts of
aliments and problems and so on.
00:09:12.99\00:09:16.29
You know just
gluten intolerance thing.
00:09:16.32\00:09:18.95
Don't eat grains
science says, okay.
00:09:18.98\00:09:22.92
Okay, but
instead science tells us
00:09:22.95\00:09:26.41
eat high fat diet, lots of meat,
00:09:26.44\00:09:30.60
we need to eat
meat, according to science
00:09:30.63\00:09:33.46
you know, because
this is hilarious,
00:09:33.49\00:09:34.96
according to science
we need to eat the way
00:09:34.99\00:09:37.75
our ancestors ate
100,000 years ago.
00:09:37.78\00:09:41.81
And I thought
it was pretty funny
00:09:41.84\00:09:43.07
when I told this to
my wife she clipped.
00:09:43.10\00:09:45.69
How did the
science know what people
00:09:45.72\00:09:47.57
who didn't even exist eat, okay?
00:09:47.60\00:09:50.19
But that's another matter.
00:09:50.22\00:09:51.53
That's another matter
entirely in regards to science.
00:09:51.56\00:09:55.10
But science here tells
us that we should eat meat,
00:09:55.13\00:09:58.95
but science also
tells us the opposite
00:09:58.98\00:10:01.49
that we shouldn't eat meat.
00:10:01.52\00:10:02.92
There is a whole host of
evidence, scientific evidence
00:10:02.95\00:10:06.47
which teaching something
radically different than
00:10:06.50\00:10:10.25
what a whole host of scientific
evidence teaches as well.
00:10:10.28\00:10:14.77
Okay, a whole host
of scientific evidence
00:10:14.80\00:10:17.90
backed up by
other science argues
00:10:17.93\00:10:21.52
backed up by
science tells us that,
00:10:21.55\00:10:26.72
plant based diet
is the best diet.
00:10:26.75\00:10:29.43
Other science says no,
no just eat a lot of meat.
00:10:29.46\00:10:33.53
So how could that--
what's going on here?
00:10:33.56\00:10:36.34
We are talking science now.
00:10:36.37\00:10:38.46
So science tells us one thing
00:10:38.49\00:10:40.51
and science
tells us the opposite
00:10:40.54\00:10:42.75
and we are not necessarily
talking different generations,
00:10:42.78\00:10:45.51
science says one thing
and then 50 years later
00:10:45.54\00:10:48.18
science comes along
and says something else.
00:10:48.21\00:10:50.55
We are talking
about simultaneously,
00:10:50.58\00:10:54.22
we are talking about
science and labs using
00:10:54.25\00:10:57.45
what has been called
the scientific method
00:10:57.48\00:11:00.20
being supposedly
objective, rational, methodical
00:11:00.23\00:11:04.78
and all these things and
they come up with opposite
00:11:04.81\00:11:08.51
or in contradictory conclusions.
00:11:08.54\00:11:13.87
How does this happen?
00:11:13.90\00:11:15.45
I mean, this is
science, objective rational,
00:11:15.48\00:11:19.85
that's what I want to look at.
00:11:19.88\00:11:22.52
You know, on the
last program I did,
00:11:22.55\00:11:24.21
we did call science of knowledge
00:11:24.24\00:11:25.98
and we looked at this
fancy term Epistemology.
00:11:26.01\00:11:30.33
It was I said it's the
study of not what we know
00:11:30.36\00:11:33.71
but what do we mean when
we say we know something.
00:11:33.74\00:11:37.16
We have different ways
of coming to knowledge.
00:11:37.19\00:11:39.96
I know that 2 + 2 = 4
differently that I know
00:11:39.99\00:11:44.80
that I have a toothache, okay.
00:11:44.83\00:11:48.74
And we look to at the
fact that science is also a--
00:11:48.77\00:11:56.05
science is
indeed an epistemology,
00:11:56.08\00:11:58.73
but it's an
empiricist of epistemology.
00:11:58.76\00:12:03.06
And what do I mean when I
say empiricist of epistemology?
00:12:03.09\00:12:08.81
What does that
mean? This is important.
00:12:08.84\00:12:12.77
Let's say I say to you,
hey, there is a room over there
00:12:12.80\00:12:16.83
and I say to you there
are 10 people in the room.
00:12:16.86\00:12:21.33
You could say all right,
00:12:21.36\00:12:22.85
I'm gonna go
over and check, okay.
00:12:22.88\00:12:25.52
And let me go see.
00:12:25.55\00:12:26.83
So that's a
perfectly reasonable way
00:12:26.86\00:12:29.23
of checking the fact
of getting the truth.
00:12:29.26\00:12:32.17
This is what we
mean by empiricism.
00:12:32.20\00:12:34.52
You go to the
room, you open the door,
00:12:34.55\00:12:36.78
you look in and you see
00:12:36.81\00:12:38.55
well, there are all
10 people in the room.
00:12:38.58\00:12:41.80
That is what is
known as empiricism.
00:12:41.83\00:12:45.44
And when you learn things
00:12:45.47\00:12:47.23
that way you are using
an empiricist epistemology.
00:12:47.26\00:12:51.30
Now suppose though I said to you
00:12:51.33\00:12:56.75
if there are 10
people in the room
00:12:56.78\00:12:59.63
then there are three
more people in the room
00:12:59.66\00:13:02.01
then there would be
00:13:02.04\00:13:03.07
if there were only
seven people in the room,
00:13:03.10\00:13:06.21
okay, and suppose in
response to that you said,
00:13:06.24\00:13:09.90
okay, let go in the room
and check and see for myself.
00:13:09.93\00:13:15.25
Huh? Why would you say that?
00:13:15.28\00:13:18.80
That would be that
would be rather unnecessary
00:13:18.83\00:13:21.96
because here
rationality tells you
00:13:21.99\00:13:24.69
that ten is
three more than seven,
00:13:24.72\00:13:27.37
so you don't have to go in
to the room and check, okay.
00:13:27.40\00:13:31.74
In the first
instance when I said
00:13:31.77\00:13:33.69
there are 10 people in the room,
00:13:33.72\00:13:35.63
you go in, you
have to go in the room.
00:13:35.66\00:13:38.23
You go in the room
and you use your senses
00:13:38.26\00:13:40.83
and you find the
answer, you find the truth.
00:13:40.86\00:13:44.02
In the second, you
don't need to do that.
00:13:44.05\00:13:47.17
You have your rational
thought gives you the answer.
00:13:47.20\00:13:50.90
The first instance
is empiricism, okay.
00:13:50.93\00:13:55.29
It's employing your
senses to understand the world.
00:13:55.32\00:14:00.18
Now the bottom line
is this as I said before,
00:14:00.21\00:14:03.73
science is
empiricist epistemology.
00:14:03.76\00:14:09.33
It's when we use
our senses to come
00:14:09.36\00:14:14.05
to a knowledge about something.
00:14:14.08\00:14:16.76
And yes, science is at its core
00:14:16.79\00:14:19.75
a very empirical way of coming
to knowledge's, knowledge.
00:14:19.78\00:14:24.69
Science use their senses often
aided by very sophisticated
00:14:24.72\00:14:29.14
interest
instruments to look at nature.
00:14:29.17\00:14:32.09
You know, I don't
care from our startle
00:14:32.12\00:14:34.15
used to just look
around at that bugs,
00:14:34.18\00:14:37.41
and plants, and creatures
and the sea to astronomers
00:14:37.44\00:14:41.08
who use the hobble
spacecraft science is empirical.
00:14:41.11\00:14:45.92
It uses sense data to get
information from the world
00:14:45.95\00:14:50.08
and then and this is crucial
00:14:50.11\00:14:51.98
and we'll have to come
back to this at some point,
00:14:52.01\00:14:54.21
they then have to
interpret that data.
00:14:54.24\00:14:57.58
What does it mean
and then from that try
00:14:57.61\00:15:00.36
and device technologies
or whatever they do from it.
00:15:00.39\00:15:04.76
Now on one level
you know this seems
00:15:04.79\00:15:07.99
all pretty clear cut and dry,
00:15:08.02\00:15:11.14
but on another
level this is something
00:15:11.17\00:15:14.31
which is flout with all--
00:15:14.34\00:15:17.51
all sorts of
problems and questions
00:15:17.54\00:15:20.56
that people have been
dealing with for centuries.
00:15:20.59\00:15:23.78
And quite
frankly, amazingly enough
00:15:23.81\00:15:26.98
they still haven't come up
with any clear cut answers.
00:15:27.01\00:15:32.30
In fact, just as a
real quick interesting aside
00:15:32.33\00:15:36.44
for something so
fruitful as science,
00:15:36.47\00:15:38.99
for something that
work so well as science does
00:15:39.02\00:15:42.64
there is it's
amazing how much disparity
00:15:42.67\00:15:45.02
and disagreement
exist in regards to science,
00:15:45.05\00:15:49.34
what it is, how it works
or what does it even teach us?
00:15:49.37\00:15:53.59
You know, scientists actually
00:15:53.62\00:15:55.04
even disagree
or what science is.
00:15:55.07\00:15:57.83
Yes, debate doesn't just exist
00:15:57.86\00:15:59.66
over the nature of
scientific conclusions
00:15:59.69\00:16:02.32
or why we conclude what
we do or what science does?
00:16:02.35\00:16:06.71
You know, people question
even what is science itself.
00:16:06.74\00:16:11.67
It's often called
the demarcation problem.
00:16:11.70\00:16:15.26
How do you decide what
counts for real science
00:16:15.29\00:16:18.48
as opposed to what
they call pseudoscience?
00:16:18.51\00:16:21.71
Now my point in all this is
00:16:21.74\00:16:22.94
I don't want it to
digress too far on this,
00:16:22.97\00:16:25.48
is that everything is not as
clear cut and dry as we think.
00:16:25.51\00:16:29.63
When we hear the statement
00:16:29.66\00:16:30.97
well, its science
we don't have to kowtow
00:16:31.00\00:16:35.15
and bend and
bend our knee before
00:16:35.18\00:16:38.31
and subject all our views to it
00:16:38.34\00:16:40.29
because it comes
with the name science.
00:16:40.32\00:16:43.91
This is a big myth,
this is a very big myth
00:16:43.94\00:16:48.39
and it's precisely
these kind of questions
00:16:48.42\00:16:50.86
that I happen wanting
to look at in this series
00:16:50.89\00:16:53.97
because I don't think
we should allow ourselves
00:16:54.00\00:16:56.95
to be intellectually
bullied by anything,
00:16:56.98\00:17:00.40
just because it comes
under the imprimatur of science.
00:17:00.43\00:17:06.58
Now any way, the
scientific endeavour
00:17:06.61\00:17:09.60
as I said is
essentially empirical one.
00:17:09.63\00:17:13.19
We use our senses to
try to understand the world.
00:17:13.22\00:17:17.83
Now it's not just that tough,
there is more to it as well.
00:17:17.86\00:17:24.35
Have you ever
thought for a minute about
00:17:24.38\00:17:27.27
how much math
is used in science?
00:17:27.30\00:17:32.05
Well, there is in
awful lot of math.
00:17:32.08\00:17:34.09
I remember when I was young,
00:17:34.12\00:17:35.51
I once thought I
wanted to be astronomer.
00:17:35.54\00:17:37.99
You know, I just sit there
00:17:38.02\00:17:39.05
and look up at the
sky with the telescope
00:17:39.08\00:17:41.55
and philosophies and news about
00:17:41.58\00:17:44.20
what's going on
Pluto or Mars or something.
00:17:44.23\00:17:47.48
But have you ever
looked in astronomy book today?
00:17:47.51\00:17:50.61
It's almost all math.
00:17:50.64\00:17:52.81
Have you ever
looked at a physics book?
00:17:52.84\00:17:54.94
It's almost all math.
00:17:54.97\00:17:57.57
So now this is quite interesting
00:17:57.60\00:17:59.92
because our ever empirical
science is at the core.
00:17:59.95\00:18:04.49
You know, it does employ math
00:18:04.52\00:18:07.60
and you can argue
that whatever math is
00:18:07.63\00:18:10.27
it's really not empirical.
00:18:10.30\00:18:12.60
I mean, have you ever, I
mean what does it do look like?
00:18:12.63\00:18:17.30
Have you ever seen it two,
00:18:17.33\00:18:18.87
just the plain old disembodied
two floating out there?
00:18:18.90\00:18:23.60
I mean you know, that
two fish not two fingers
00:18:23.63\00:18:27.02
I mean, just a
disembodied number two.
00:18:27.05\00:18:30.36
What does it
look like? What form?
00:18:30.39\00:18:32.43
What shape does it have?
00:18:32.46\00:18:34.03
And two is easy,
what is a negative six?
00:18:34.06\00:18:37.51
I mean does a negative six have
00:18:37.54\00:18:39.19
any kind of existence out there?
00:18:39.22\00:18:41.75
And you know, what are
these things even look like?
00:18:41.78\00:18:44.27
Whatever they are they
certainly not empirical
00:18:44.30\00:18:48.79
and yet math is kind of
00:18:48.82\00:18:50.76
is a kind of
language used to explain
00:18:50.79\00:18:53.34
what supposedly is
going on in the real world,
00:18:53.37\00:18:57.48
the empirical world,
the world of science.
00:18:57.51\00:19:01.97
Things are just out there
00:19:02.00\00:19:03.54
and we really try to
try to understand them
00:19:03.57\00:19:06.87
and we use things
like math to describe them
00:19:06.90\00:19:09.46
because that's really
all math can do is describe.
00:19:09.49\00:19:12.37
Mathematical equations
never explain anything,
00:19:12.40\00:19:17.28
they just describe.
00:19:17.31\00:19:19.81
But anyway even using
math science is empirical.
00:19:19.84\00:19:23.58
We use our senses
to try to figure out
00:19:23.61\00:19:25.64
what's going on to describe
it, to explain it anyway.
00:19:25.67\00:19:30.01
Now how accurate is all
these things that we do?
00:19:30.04\00:19:34.12
How well do they work?
00:19:34.15\00:19:35.80
And then you run
into another problem too.
00:19:35.83\00:19:38.41
Think of all the
social influences
00:19:38.44\00:19:42.08
and forces that impact science.
00:19:42.11\00:19:44.62
Think of all the
science that was done funded
00:19:44.65\00:19:47.02
by the tobacco
companies on the question about
00:19:47.05\00:19:49.95
whether tobacco
was really bad for you.
00:19:49.98\00:19:52.76
No question.
00:19:52.79\00:19:54.38
Science is an
empiricist epistemology
00:19:54.41\00:19:57.91
and such it comes
with all sorts of problems
00:19:57.94\00:20:01.39
and loop holes and things
00:20:01.42\00:20:03.30
that today have
still not been resolved.
00:20:03.33\00:20:08.71
You know, think
about it on one level,
00:20:08.74\00:20:11.44
think about it on one level how,
00:20:11.47\00:20:16.17
how deceitful our senses can be.
00:20:16.20\00:20:19.89
You know, we've all ready talked
00:20:19.92\00:20:21.16
about this in other programs
00:20:21.19\00:20:23.56
but let me give you
an example for a minute.
00:20:23.59\00:20:27.22
Let's go back to the
room with 10 people, okay.
00:20:27.25\00:20:32.60
I said some one says
there's 10 people in the room
00:20:32.63\00:20:35.64
you walked in, and you
see, and you use your senses,
00:20:35.67\00:20:38.89
and you count whatever,
and you count 10 people.
00:20:38.92\00:20:42.14
How could there be any question?
00:20:42.17\00:20:44.07
Can't you be assure of that
as you were of the statement
00:20:44.10\00:20:48.67
well, if there 10 people
in the room then there is,
00:20:48.70\00:20:51.89
then there is three
more people in the room
00:20:51.92\00:20:54.14
then they were of there were
just seven people in the room
00:20:54.17\00:20:58.02
can't you be just too certain.
00:20:58.05\00:20:59.99
Isn't in this case an
empiricist epistemology
00:21:00.02\00:21:04.03
working just as
well as rationalism?
00:21:04.06\00:21:08.35
Well, suppose
you are in the room
00:21:08.38\00:21:12.12
and you count 10 people,
00:21:12.15\00:21:14.68
but suppose some one was
hiding underneath a table
00:21:14.71\00:21:17.72
and you didn't see him
00:21:17.75\00:21:19.39
or suppose they were in
the rafters over your head
00:21:19.42\00:21:22.91
or suppose your
definition of the room
00:21:22.94\00:21:25.88
or somebody else's
definition of the room
00:21:25.91\00:21:28.34
didn't include the
concept of the closet
00:21:28.37\00:21:31.38
and there were two
people in the closet
00:21:31.41\00:21:34.13
or suppose you are an American
00:21:34.16\00:21:36.04
who lived in the
time of the confederacy
00:21:36.07\00:21:38.88
when slaves were considered
only two thirds a person,
00:21:38.91\00:21:42.38
and there were
four slaves in the room,
00:21:42.41\00:21:45.36
how many people
would be in the room?
00:21:45.39\00:21:49.10
Suddenly it's not
so clear cut and dry.
00:21:49.13\00:21:53.32
But then you say
but doesn't science
00:21:53.35\00:21:55.09
create all these
fancy instruments
00:21:55.12\00:21:58.10
to help us
understand the world around us?
00:21:58.13\00:22:01.16
Of course it does,
and these instruments
00:22:01.19\00:22:03.81
can be very, very helpful.
00:22:03.84\00:22:06.47
But I don't think
that's a move somebody
00:22:06.50\00:22:09.64
who want's to defend
an empiricist epistemology
00:22:09.67\00:22:13.76
would want to make
a move on defending
00:22:13.79\00:22:16.46
empiricist
epistemology about giving us
00:22:16.49\00:22:18.99
an accurate view of the world.
00:22:19.02\00:22:20.58
I'm not so sure that's some
move you want to make, okay.
00:22:20.61\00:22:24.15
Someone once
expressed it like this,
00:22:24.18\00:22:26.71
doctor so and so has a theory
00:22:26.74\00:22:29.77
that the world
is made of vectors.
00:22:29.80\00:22:32.46
So doctor so and so builds
a device looking for vectors
00:22:32.49\00:22:37.56
and what do you know,
00:22:37.59\00:22:38.63
doctor so and so with
the device finds vectors,
00:22:38.66\00:22:42.57
thus doctor so and so
has got rational empirical,
00:22:42.60\00:22:46.28
I mean he is got empirical proof
00:22:46.31\00:22:48.15
that the world is
made of vectors, okay.
00:22:48.18\00:22:51.74
Now to be fair science
doesn't always work this way
00:22:51.77\00:22:56.13
and there have been examples
00:22:56.16\00:22:57.20
where they have found things
that they really didn't expect.
00:22:57.23\00:23:00.84
Anyway the point of all
this, the point is simply this,
00:23:00.87\00:23:04.80
you can't build,
00:23:04.83\00:23:06.64
even scientific
instruments can't be built
00:23:06.67\00:23:10.44
without the
scientist already building
00:23:10.47\00:23:13.21
his or her
presuppositions into it already.
00:23:13.24\00:23:17.73
Now the scientist
might have some brilliant
00:23:17.76\00:23:19.71
and well funded,
00:23:19.74\00:23:20.99
well founded reasons
for those presuppositions
00:23:21.02\00:23:24.15
and they might
even be right and so on
00:23:24.18\00:23:26.80
and the machines are accurate,
00:23:26.83\00:23:29.47
but they might be dead wrong too
00:23:29.50\00:23:31.57
and they might give us
00:23:31.60\00:23:32.74
a totally incorrect
view of the world as well.
00:23:32.77\00:23:37.13
And then when
you have your devise
00:23:37.16\00:23:38.44
how do you know
it's working well
00:23:38.47\00:23:40.42
or there some
unknown factors going on.
00:23:40.45\00:23:43.71
I once read where a
book where they said
00:23:43.74\00:23:45.58
may be the color of
the scientist lab coat.
00:23:45.61\00:23:49.89
Good influence the out
come of the experiment.
00:23:49.92\00:23:54.66
You know, I think for a minute
00:23:54.69\00:23:55.73
of that giant
particle accelerator
00:23:55.76\00:23:58.25
they have got in Switzerland,
soon this mass of thing
00:23:58.28\00:24:02.63
and they don't like you
calling them atom smashers
00:24:02.66\00:24:04.78
but they shoot
these sub atomic particles
00:24:04.81\00:24:07.40
around this thing
at super high speeds
00:24:07.43\00:24:09.76
and they smash into each other
and they crack and they blow up
00:24:09.79\00:24:13.39
and, and then they
study whatever comes out
00:24:13.42\00:24:17.04
and they say they were looking
00:24:17.07\00:24:18.46
for the Higgs boson
or something for it.
00:24:18.49\00:24:21.46
Now when they
say they smash atoms
00:24:21.49\00:24:23.32
and look for
particles that come out
00:24:23.35\00:24:25.06
what are they mean?
00:24:25.09\00:24:26.44
I mean, they
don't need to smash them
00:24:26.47\00:24:28.29
and then
somebody takes a tweezers
00:24:28.32\00:24:30.30
and picks up a
Higgs boson and says,
00:24:30.33\00:24:32.34
hello, hello here is
the Higgs boson, okay.
00:24:32.37\00:24:35.92
No, they go-- I
don't know exactly
00:24:35.95\00:24:37.70
what they mean but
they have detectors
00:24:37.73\00:24:41.43
that they spend $650 million
on the detector alone, okay.
00:24:41.46\00:24:48.48
Now, I don't know all that
goes in-- went into all this,
00:24:48.51\00:24:52.59
but when you spend
$650 million on a detector
00:24:52.62\00:24:57.22
you're building in
a lot of assumptions,
00:24:57.25\00:24:59.82
a lot presuppositions into this.
00:24:59.85\00:25:02.48
I can't even begin to imagine
00:25:02.51\00:25:05.18
how fantastically
complicated all this would be,
00:25:05.21\00:25:10.04
okay, and you were
working with a lot of data
00:25:10.07\00:25:12.80
being interpreted
by a lot of people
00:25:12.83\00:25:15.13
being study and analyzed
and so forth, and that's fine.
00:25:15.16\00:25:18.80
I imagine they know
what they are doing.
00:25:18.83\00:25:22.24
But let's not
forget what they are doing?
00:25:22.27\00:25:25.91
Let's not forget
00:25:25.94\00:25:27.50
that there is a whole
lot more presuppositions,
00:25:27.53\00:25:31.48
a whole lot more
subjectivity built in to this
00:25:31.51\00:25:35.42
then I think we
looking at it on the surface
00:25:35.45\00:25:39.34
we tend to think.
00:25:39.37\00:25:41.95
In fact, there is a
whole lot more subjectivity
00:25:41.98\00:25:44.77
in all our scientific endeavors,
00:25:44.80\00:25:48.60
than, than most
people would think.
00:25:48.63\00:25:51.30
That's just a peculiar nature
of human knowledge in general
00:25:51.33\00:25:56.83
an empirical
knowledge in particular
00:25:56.86\00:25:59.83
and this subjectivity
also includes in a great way,
00:25:59.86\00:26:06.94
human science.
00:26:06.97\00:26:09.73
As I said, science is--
00:26:09.76\00:26:13.20
as we said in empirical
attempt to understand the world
00:26:13.23\00:26:17.45
and precisely because it's that,
00:26:17.48\00:26:20.51
it's filled with all
sorts of subjectivity
00:26:20.54\00:26:24.51
that no doubt, no
doubt gets in the way
00:26:24.54\00:26:29.69
to some degree or another.
00:26:29.72\00:26:32.03
Now does this mean that
science is always wrong?
00:26:32.06\00:26:35.62
Of course not okay,
00:26:35.65\00:26:37.87
but it should help us be
very, very, very of the idea
00:26:37.90\00:26:42.36
that science is always right.
00:26:42.39\00:26:44.62
And if science says something
00:26:44.65\00:26:47.04
and then we as Christians
just have to flat out accepted
00:26:47.07\00:26:51.29
even if it contradicts
our believes sorry folks,
00:26:51.32\00:26:55.14
but that doesn't work that way.
00:26:55.17\00:26:56.98
It shouldn't
work that way, okay,
00:26:57.01\00:27:00.14
because unfortunately
for many Christians it does.
00:27:00.17\00:27:03.78
We have as believers
very good reasons for belief
00:27:03.81\00:27:08.57
and we need to remember
that science is a human project
00:27:08.60\00:27:13.28
and thus a priori we can
argue that it's always flawed.
00:27:13.31\00:27:19.06
And I think about
the knowledge of science
00:27:19.09\00:27:21.59
in contrast to a
different kind of knowledge,
00:27:21.62\00:27:26.01
this comes in Job 28,
00:27:26.04\00:27:29.15
"Where does wisdom come from?
00:27:29.18\00:27:31.45
Where does understanding dwell?
00:27:31.48\00:27:34.03
God understands the way
00:27:34.06\00:27:35.53
He do it for He alone
knows where it dwells.
00:27:35.56\00:27:38.49
For He views the
ends of the earth
00:27:38.52\00:27:40.86
and sees
everything under the heavens.
00:27:40.89\00:27:43.53
When He established
the force of the wind
00:27:43.56\00:27:46.05
and measured out the waters,
00:27:46.08\00:27:47.87
when He made a
decree for the rain
00:27:47.90\00:27:50.35
and path for the thunder storm,
00:27:50.38\00:27:52.63
then He looked at
wisdom and appraised it.
00:27:52.66\00:27:56.34
He confirmed it and He tested it
00:27:56.37\00:28:00.97
and He said to man
the fear of the Lord
00:28:01.00\00:28:05.73
that is wisdom and to
shun evil is understanding."
00:28:05.76\00:28:12.03
What, how in the world
could science ever give us
00:28:12.06\00:28:16.28
that kind of knowledge?
00:28:16.31\00:28:18.37