Science’s worst nightmare is metaphysics. Science came to say that everything metaphysics says is wrong and that science knows better! Let us compare the general outlines of what the two have had to say.
Metaphysics claims the supreme reality to be the only reality that exists:
Supreme Reality is Absolute and Infinite. Its unity and unicity relate to the Absolute; and its totality and plenitude relate to its infinitude. It is an uncaused cause; there is nothing outside it.
Science posits that physical reality is the only thing that exists: Physical Reality is the supreme reality of science. It is absolute, in the sense that physical reality exists independently of our consciousness of it. It is infinite, in the sense that it has no edges and no outside. It doesn’t need a cause outside itself; it just came into existence without any reason; it is uncaused. Everything that exists falls under this physical reality and explained by it. Everything is reducible to this physical reality since it is the foundation of all that there is.
Both science and metaphysics posit an absolute, uncaused reality to underlie everything; unity and unicity, totality and infinity, are the essential characteristics of this Supreme Reality that exists on its own; it doesn’t depend on us for its existence but we depend on it for our existence.
These two talk about one and the same thing; only adopting different terminology. One calls its spiritual reality and governed by an absolute principle called god; the other calls it physical reality governed by absolute principles called the laws of nature. The difference is only in names.
Science not only didn’t refute metaphysics but confirmed it even better than metaphysicists could ever do. Their battle has always been over authority and terminology.
A few totalitarian individuals sitting in elitist circles, whether academic or religious, determining what the people should accept as their truth. But neither science nor religion has any right to truth whatsoever, for their own legitimacy and authority is at the mercy of the mass’s acceptance of them. Both science and religion are creations of man, yet we are too stupid to see that our own creations have come to tell us how we are created!
Particularly science, it is just like a hammer that works well; but is functionality a reason to stand and say “the hammer is the truth?!” A hammer may be perfect, but its perfection is determined relative to me and my needs. Science is a mere tool for theoretical modeling motivated by practical needs; it has nothing to do with reality and truth. Science exists only in the minds of scientists; but according to this same science human consciousness is subjective and relative, and hence not a credible source of truth and determination of objective reality. If this is so, then how can science, a purely subjective phenomenon, make objective claims about reality?!
On the other hand, if we accept the scientific picture of man as a being like all animals, motivated only by personal interests satisfying his need to survive, if man’s life is all about survival in nature and all human works are manifestations of his survival instinct, then science too as one of man’s achievements should have been motivated by self-interest and the need to survival; then how can this science have any objective value at all? How can it give a picture of reality as it is while it is itself biased under the weight of personal interests and needs!?
Science’s account of man which relativizes mankind and his existence, which makes man as meaningless as the rest, is a suicide for science, for if man is so relative and unimportant, then how can his science have any value and meaning whatsoever?! A science that brings man down also brings itself down. Modern science is a perfect instance of self-refutation. When there are scientists this stupid to say that “free will doesn’t exist,” then how can one have the slightest respect for this science?! Not that I favor free will; but for someone to claim that free will doesn’t exist, his own assertion is a refutation of the assertion itself; if free will doesn’t exist, then this stupid man could not have possibly say so out of free will; he is made to say so and could not say otherwise; thus, his assertion that “free will doesn’t exist” is devoid of any objective, scientific value; and this falsifies that “there is no free will!” But we see many such claims coming out of the scientific community. Is this the state of current science and its scientists!? One may even wonder if science is just another superstition; it is just that we are historically in it an thinking it to be real and factual. Only later we will realize that we left the Dark Ages only to enter into a darker one. When it comes to modern science and its fanatic followers who don’t allow themselves to think for themselves, one can only say: The outward arrogance is the reflection of inward ignorance.
The case of science and religion and the fanaticism that surrounds both of them indicate how people over and over again fall into the trap of letting themselves being determined by their own determinations.
Science can never tell me who I am, for I made science what it is.
Thinking for yourself, you must realize that you can never be anything that you are told to be, for you cannot be at once what you accept to be and the one doing the accepting.
We are what we have accepted to be. This is the truth to be realized.