I recently featured Charles Darwin in one of the 365 days of philosophy posts (Darwin Day is celebrated earlier in the year, on the 12th February), but I didn’t go into detail on his relevance to philosophy. So for the next week or so, I’ll be taking a brief look at the relationship between science and philosophy.

I have mentioned how there have been philosophers in ancient times who debated the nature of reality - whether knowledge is intuitive or based on observation; the differences between rationalism and empiricism. And the scientific method is a way for people to ascertain what is real and knowable. In fact, it can be argued that science and the scientific method are some of the great advances in epistemology, rather than using revealed truth or relying on authority.

One immediate problem is just how relevant scientific findings are to situations we come across — not everything might be solved by science, such as the ultimate solution to dealing with the feeling of a broken heart; nor do we have easy answers to big questions like the ultimate best way to live, or how to rule a country (that, say, can be replicated in a laboratory!).

There’s even some questions that scientists are still exploring, such as the nature of the galaxy, or how to cure or treat certain conditions, or even the sources of illnesses. So it’s important to recognise that while science is arguably one of the best methods we have to investigate and explain things, it can’t dismiss nor explain everything as easily as we might hope.

Further Resources:

Introduction to Philosophy of Science