Harmonia Philosophica (2020)
AbstractThe idea of science being the best – or the only – way to reach the truth about our cosmos has been a major belief of modern civilization. Yet, science has grown tall on fragile legs of clay. Every scientific theory uses axioms and assumptions that by definition cannot be proved. This poses a serious limitation to the use of science as a tool to find the truth. The only way to search for the latter is to redefine the former to its original glory. In the days well before Galileo and Newton, science and religion were not separated. They worked together to discover the truth and while the latter had God as its final destination, the former had God as its starting point. Science is based on the irrational (unproven) belief that the world is intelligible along many other assumptions. This poses a serious limitation to science that can only be overcome if we accept the irrationality of the cosmos. The motto “Credo quia absurdum” holds more truth than one can ever realize at first glance. There is nothing logical in logic, whereas there is deep wisdom in the irrational. For while the former tries to build castles on moving sand, the latter digs deep inside the depths of existence itself in order to build on the most concrete foundations that there can be: the cosmos itself. The only way forward is backwards. Backwards to a time when religion led the quest for knowledge by accepting what we cannot know, rather than trying to comprehend what we do not. Science was anyway based on that in the first place.
Similar books and articles
Does cognitive science show belief in god to be irrational? The epistemic consequences of the cognitive science of religion.Joshua C. Thurow - 2013 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 74 (1):77-98.
Religion and Science unification.Spyridon Kakos - 2017 - International Journal of Theology, Philosophy and Science 1 (1):78-95.
Against the realistic interpretation of the Theory of Relativity.Spyridon Kakos - 2019 - Harmonia Philosophica.
Karl Jaspers. Plaidoyer for Philosophy. Philosophy and its Difference from Religion and Science.Vesna Batovanja - 2008 - Synthesis Philosophica 23 (1):177-187.
Why Do Irrational Beliefs Mimic Science? The Cultural Evolution of Pseudoscience.Stefaan Blancke, Maarten Boudry & Massimo Pigliucci - 2016 - Theoria 82 (4).
Why Do Irrational Beliefs Mimic Science? The Cultural Evolution of Pseudoscience.Stefaan Blancke, Maarten Boudry & Massimo Pigliucci - 2017 - Theoria 83 (1):78-97.
Scientific Ethics: A New Approach.Marcello Menapace - 2019 - Science and Engineering Ethics 25 (4):1193-1216.
Theory and Truth: Philosophical Critique Within Foundational Science.Lawrence Sklar - 2000 - Oxford University Press.
Harmonia Philosophica: The philosophy of the irrational.Spyridon Kakos - 2015 - Φιλοσοφείν 1 (11):359-374.
Aristotle‘s axiomatic science:peripatetic notation or pedagogical plan?Alan R. Perreiah - 1993 - History and Philosophy of Logic 14 (1):87-99.
From Galileo to Hubble: Copernican principle as a philosophical dogma defining modern astronomy.Spyridon Kakos - 2018 - International Journal of Theology, Philosophy and Science 2 (3):13-37.
Foundations of the Unity of Science, Vol. I. No. 2: Foundations of the Theory of Signs.Foundations of the Unity of Science, Vol. I. No. 3: Foundations of Logic and Mathematics.Foundations of the Unity of Science, Vol. I. No. 4: Linguistic Aspects of Science. [REVIEW]Frederic B. Fitch, Charles W. Morris, Rudolf Carnap & Leonard Bloomfield - 1940 - Philosophical Review 49 (6):678.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads