Where the Rubber Hits the Road

Who declared that science was the single discipline that gets to determine what is to be considered the path to discover 'truth' in western society? I mean, we have always accepted different means of discerning truth. Now the scientific method is presented by atheists as the means by which societal and moral decisions are to be made. Do the lessons of history not contain truth? Is philosophy no longer a font from which we can find meaning to the events of our life? Will I need a biologist to prove that I love my vocation as a priest? Do you need one to prove that you love those close to you? For that matter, could science even pronounce on such subjects that it have nothing to do with? Science cannot explain love, faith, joy. Science cannot tell me why a magnificent sunrise is capable of moving my mind and soul in ways that are hard to explain. Science cannot explain the genius of a Mozart or the artist's eye of Picasso. Science cannot even tell me why I a...

Below you'll find part of an exchange I'm engaged in on the Holy Post with somehow going by the handle 'Shibboleth'.  The subject? Can the application of the scientific method to determine the truths of whether or not supernatural forces or beings do exist. I thought you might like comment of the exchange. At the very least, I hope you find it interesting. Fr. Tim ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 11:59 AM on June 13, 2010 Tim: I have asked some pointed questions and made statements which may have initially made you bristle. The reason I have done so is because of my bias toward scientific methodology. Sufficiency is a term among many others to ensure a persons claim is tested according to scientific rigueur. Specifically, evidence offered in support of any claim must be adaquate to establish the truth of that claim with: 1) the burden of proof for any claim resting on th...