What are the limits of science - An interview with Dominique Lambert

Summary

The transcript explores the inherent limits of science, categorizing them into three main types: epistemological, metaphysical, and ethical. It argues that while science effectively describes and explains phenomena, it fails to justify its foundational principles and address deeper meanings of existence. Moreover, science does not provide ethical frameworks for the implications of its practices, especially in experiments involving humans. The discussion highlights that these limitations signify a need for philosophical and ethical considerations beyond the scientific methodology, ultimately suggesting that a comprehensive understanding of reality requires insights from multiple disciplines.

Takeaways

• 🔍 Science cannot explain its own foundations, leading to an epistemological limit.
• 🧠 Philosopher Maurice Blondel argued that science is not self-sufficient in justifying its principles.
• 🌌 While science effectively describes the universe, it avoids addressing the deeper meanings behind its findings.
• 💡 The quest for understanding the universe's significance falls into the realm of metaphysics, which science methodologically sidesteps.
• 🧬 Science generates ethical questions but lacks the framework to provide moral guidance or assessments.
• 👥 The dignity of individuals is a crucial ethical concern that science does not define or address adequately.
• 📊 Scientific methodologies have no inherent limits, but the scope of science is restricted to its own plane of inquiry.
• 🌐 The intersection of science, ethics, and metaphysics reveals the limitations of a purely scientific approach to complex questions.
• 🚀 Despite its power, science does not engage with the fundamental existential questions that arise from its discoveries.
• 📏 Science's vast methodological surface does not allow it to venture effectively into deeper philosophical or ethical realms.

Q & A

What is the first limit of science discussed in the transcript?

The first limit of science is its epistemological limit, meaning that science cannot explain its own foundations or justify the necessary conditions that allow it to function effectively.

How does the speaker describe the relationship between science and metaphysics?

The speaker explains that while science describes many phenomena in the universe, it avoids addressing the deeper meanings or purposes behind those phenomena, which are metaphysical questions.

What is meant by the 'second type of limit' of science?

The second type of limit refers to science's methodological refusal to engage with metaphysical questions, such as the deep meaning or finality of the universe, which are essential to philosophical inquiry.

What ethical concerns are associated with scientific practice?

The ethical concerns involve the impact of scientific experiments on humans and organisms, as science lacks the ability to prescribe moral judgments or ethical assessments regarding its findings and methodologies.

Why does the speaker believe science cannot fully justify its own foundations?

The speaker cites that science is based on concepts like reality and truth, but it does not provide a self-sufficient justification for these foundational concepts.

What analogy does the speaker use to explain the limits of science?

The speaker uses the analogy of a table to represent the methodological field of science, suggesting that while science grows on this surface, it cannot perceive issues in the vertical directions, such as metaphysical and ethical questions.

What does the speaker suggest is necessary for ethical assessment in relation to scientific practices?

The speaker indicates that while science provides descriptions of the universe, a foundational understanding of these descriptions is essential for ethical assessment and consideration of moral implications.

How does the speaker view the interaction between science and ethics?

The speaker views the interaction between science and ethics as problematic, stating that science can generate important ethical questions but lacks the tools to adequately address or resolve them.

What is the speaker's overall perspective on the power and limitations of science?

The speaker acknowledges that science is powerful and capable of explaining many phenomena but emphasizes that its true limitations lie in its inability to engage with metaphysical and ethical dimensions.

What final thoughts does the speaker have regarding the limits of science?

The speaker concludes that while science does not face real limits within its methodological field, it cannot address critical questions in metaphysics and ethics, suggesting a need for a broader approach to understanding these dimensions.