# Science the only way to the truth? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 4, 2001, 5:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/science-the-only-way-to-the-truth/79628 "2001-09-04T05:06:35Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 7\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![The\_Great\_Gazoo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/67e7ee/32.png) [@The\_Great\_Gazoo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Great_Gazoo)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2001, 9:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/science-the-only-way-to-the-truth/79628/61 "2001-09-06T21:33:30Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by JThunder \* > \*\* > > > [@](#): > > > > \*Originally posted by ultrafilter \* > > \*\*I disagree. I say it’s an axiomatic claim, that we either accept as self-evidently true, or reject as self-evidently false. Either way, where’s the contradiction? \*\* > > Okay, let’s explain this again. > > Statement A: Science is the only way to know the truth. > > However, Statement A is not scientific. Ergo, Statement A contradicts itself. > > If you’re going to claim that Statement A is true, then you must be prepared to prove it scientifically. If you can’t, then you have a contradiction on your hand. \*\* I think others have said this already, but here goes: NOBODY WANTS TO CLAIM THAT STATEMENT A IS TRUE! IT’S A STUPID STATEMENT!! OK, on to something else… ---
**Author:** ![JubilationTCornpone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ee59a6/32.png) [@JubilationTCornpone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JubilationTCornpone)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2001, 11:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/science-the-only-way-to-the-truth/79628/62 "2001-09-07T23:52:10Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by The Great Gazoo \* > \*\* > > > [@](#): > > > > \*Originally posted by JThunder \* > > \*\* > > > > > [@](#): > > > > > > \*Originally posted by ultrafilter \* > > > \*\*I disagree. I say it’s an axiomatic claim, that we either accept as self-evidently true, or reject as self-evidently false. Either way, where’s the contradiction? \*\* > > > > Okay, let’s explain this again. > > > > Statement A: Science is the only way to know the truth. > > > > However, Statement A is not scientific. Ergo, Statement A contradicts itself. > > > > If you’re going to claim that Statement A is true, then you must be prepared to prove it scientifically. If you can’t, then you have a contradiction on your hand. \*\* > > I think others have said this already, but here goes: > > NOBODY WANTS TO CLAIM THAT STATEMENT A IS TRUE! > IT’S A STUPID STATEMENT!!\*\* You’re missing the point. Yes, we agree that the statement is false. However, some people don’t believe it’s self-contradictory. The text which you quoted demonstrates that it DOES contradict itself. In other words, there are two claims being discussed: “Is Statement A true?” and “Is it self-refuting?” The people here – or rather, most of them – agree on the first point, but not on the second. (I say “most” because at least one poster described it as an “axiomatic claim,” which isn’t the same as saying it’s false.) Also, some people _DO_ claim that Statement A is true. Heck, it was stated as a principal argument in a formal debate. Besides, I myself have heard it said in other contexts, by people who should know better. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Ryan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7feea3/32.png) [@The\_Ryan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Ryan)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2001, 1:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/science-the-only-way-to-the-truth/79628/63 "2001-09-08T01:10:32Z")
[QUOTE] \*Originally posted by JThunder \* > [@](#): > > Okay, let’s explain this again. > > Statement A: Science is the only way to know the truth. > > However, Statement A is not scientific. Ergo, Statement A contradicts itself. This makes no sense. “Statement A is not scientific. Ergo, Statement A contradicts itself” is valid only if Statement A claims that it is scientific. Since Statement A never claimed to be scientific, it is not contradictory. I really don’t understand why so many people have such great trouble understanding what the word “contradict” means. It does not mean “expresses a belief I disagree with”. It means “says that both A and not A are true”. If you think that this statement contradicts itself, you need to find some statement which it both comfirms and denies. > [@](#): > > I agree what you said. In addition, it’s not possible to scientifically _identify_ all possible means of discerning the truth. (For example, how do you scientifically test the statement, “We have found all possible tests for the truth”?) That’s just one of the reasons why this statement is not a scientific one. Science does not require that we examine every situation. Has there every been a scientific test that objects of different masses dropped in Borneo on the third Wednesday of the month during a full moon while the experimenter sings the theme song from “Mr. Ed” fall at the same rate? I doubt it. Does that mean that the theory of gravity is not scientific? ---
**Author:** ![JubilationTCornpone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ee59a6/32.png) [@JubilationTCornpone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JubilationTCornpone)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2001, 5:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/science-the-only-way-to-the-truth/79628/64 "2001-09-08T17:21:39Z")
[QUOTE] \*Originally posted by The Ryan \* \*\* > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by JThunder \* > > > [@](#): > > > > Okay, let’s explain this again. > > > > Statement A: Science is the only way to know the truth. > > > > However, Statement A is not scientific. Ergo, Statement A contradicts itself. > > This makes no sense. “Statement A is not scientific. Ergo, Statement A contradicts itself” is valid only if Statement A claims that it is scientific. Since Statement A never claimed to be scientific, it is not contradictory. \*\* Yes, it is. It says that science is the only way to know the truth. It purports to be a true statement, so it also purports to be scientific. Clear yet? ---
**Author:** ![JubilationTCornpone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ee59a6/32.png) [@JubilationTCornpone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JubilationTCornpone)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2001, 5:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/science-the-only-way-to-the-truth/79628/65 "2001-09-08T17:42:54Z")
**Ryan** , maybe this will make this more clear. If we say that Statement A is not scientific, they according to itself, we can not know that it’s true. If we do not know that it’s true, then we do not know that we do not know that it’s true. Ergo, we have contradictions built upon contradictions. That statement claims to present a known truth, but indirectly shows that this truth can not be known. On the other hand, if we say that it **is** scientific, then we are making a claim that is both false and unproven. So, the contradiction remains. BTW, there’s something that the critics keep missing. Some of you claim that the statement **is** scientifically testable . We’ve already seen many problems with that claim, such as the impossibility of reliably identifying all possible non-scientific paths to knowledge. Even if we grant that claim though, another problem still remains. Until the experiment is _actually conducted_ **and comes out positive** , Statement A still can not be considered a scientific claim. Hence, the contradiction remains. So in summary, if Statement A is scientifically untestable, it immediately contradicts itself. If it is testable but false, then it is unscientific, and so it also contradicts itself. And if it testable (which it isn’t!) but “true,” – well, that test hasn’t been conducted yet, and so we can not legitimately claim its truth. Ergo, we contradict ourselves if we claim to know that it’s true. ---
**Author:** ![JubilationTCornpone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ee59a6/32.png) [@JubilationTCornpone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JubilationTCornpone)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2001, 6:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/science-the-only-way-to-the-truth/79628/66 "2001-09-08T18:07:23Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by JubilationTCornpone \* > \*\* > > > [@](#): > > > > \*Originally posted by The Ryan \* > > This makes no sense. “Statement A is not scientific. Ergo, Statement A contradicts itself” is valid only if Statement A claims that it is scientific. Since Statement A never claimed to be scientific, it is not contradictory. > > Yes, it is. > > It says that science is the only way to know the truth. It purports to be a true statement, so it also purports to be scientific. Clear yet? \*\* BTW, in case it isn’t clear yet, I would have been more precise in saying that _the person claiming Statement A_ would be contradicting himself. He would be claiming Statement A to be true, even though he has no scientific proof thereof. Ultimately, that’s the bottom line. If someone says that science is the only way to know something, you can just ask “And what scientific technique did you use to arrive at that conclusion?” BTW, a previous poster claims that we must arrive at _somehow_. That’s true – but **only** because we arrive at them by recognizing their self-evidency, and thus _assume_ them to be true. For example, you can not logically prove that “If A implies B, and B implies C, then A implies C” is true. Why? Because it is a fundamental rule of logic, one which science implicitly assumes. Since science assumes its correctness, we can not use science to test its validity – except insofar as it might be disproven through _reductio ad absurdum_, which I’m confident would never happen. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Ryan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7feea3/32.png) [@The\_Ryan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Ryan)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2001, 12:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/science-the-only-way-to-the-truth/79628/67 "2001-09-09T00:37:35Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by JubilationTCornpone \* > If we say that Statement A is not scientific, they according to itself, we can not know that it’s true. If we do not know that it’s true, then we do not know that we do not know that it’s true. Ergo, we have contradictions built upon contradictions. I don’t see any contradiction. Can you explicitly state the statement which has been proven both true and false, and show how it has been so proven? > [@](#): > > BTW, in case it isn’t clear yet, I would have been more precise in saying that _the person claiming Statement A_ would be contradicting himself. He would be claiming Statement A to be true, even though he has no scientific proof thereof. If someone makes this statement, all they are claiming is that they **believe** the statement. Just because you **believe** something, that doesn’t mean you **know** it. If someone were to state that science is the only way to **belief** , rather than **knowledge** , that would be an incredibly silly statement. “We must reject this, because we do not know that it is true” strikes me as a very curious attitude. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/science-the-only-way-to-the-truth/79628.md?page=3)