Reply to comment

Firstly, some thoughts about the “loopy science”: I agree with the theory that science is not linear, but I feel it hard to accept the idea that “science is unable to establish truth”. When saying so, aren’t we already on the way of establishing some kinds of truth? If the truth cannot be established, then these statements are to be questioned, which means it is still possible that there is the “universal truth”. My personal opinion is that science may not reveal the truth does not necessarily mean the truth does not exist. When we say something is “less wrong” than the other, we can also say it is “more right”, otherwise there would be no right or wrong in the first place. And to me, science is the process through which we understand things more and more right. What we discover now might be far from the truth, but one day we will get to the point infinitely close to truth. Just like 0.9999…=1, at that time, what we establish IS truth.

On the basis of my theory about “truth”, here are some other thoughts: What I found most interesting is the conversation about how our comfort zone can affect our belief. Since neither story can be proven wrong, why do people these days incline toward Dickinson’s view? Is that because of people’s favor in science? For me, it seems that I’m intentionally resisting everything that can be marked as “unscientific”. Although I think the idea that we all have souls somewhat comforting, my “hard science” self never failed to make me believe that behaviors are all about brain. The question “Is it legitimate to establish a theory because it is comforting to us?” is especially intriguing. After our class, I kept asking myself this question. Different from Professor Grobstein’s view, my answer is “no”. To me, science is about getting closer to truth. If a scientific theory cannot help us do so, then it loses its scientific value. If we just need some theories to make us feel comfortable, why can’t we simply become a religious person/philosopher? The truth stands regardless of the comfort/discomfort of any individual; so should science be. (Of course, from another perspective, someone can say I think in this way because the idea of “truth” makes me comfortable. That is probably true, but since our brains are far from fully understood, I would just leave the thoughts here…)