Science is a tool for the search for truth is a myth. Maybe, on the other hand, it’s a pure myth — one that relates a metaphysical, hidden, unprovable truth. It’s a mythical story, I opine, people who believe in science tell themselves to feel good. My continued voice for skepticism is directed toward the truth claim that, as a tool, it is the only authoritative war to determine reality. That “truth claim” is a metaphysic and is based on faith. Secondly, I don’t think anyone in their right mind can claim that knowledge is some sort of neural tool. “Knowledge is power” must be a dubious axiom in your way thinking, then. I suspect I’m wrongly interpreting your belief in “neutral tools.” Do you reject that axiom – knowledge is power – as an untruth? If not, what have been the effects or consequences of that power? Or is cause and effect another illusion? You believe that scientific and technological advances are improvements and are progressive. Industrial civilization, which would not have been conceivable without science, is destroying the biosphere. Destruction of the biosphere negates any and all so called “progress” and “search for truth” unless of course you believe in the immortality of heroic identity projects. One reason, probably the main reason, is the failure of scientific knowledge to incorporate ethics. It’s a system’s failure. I don’t blame a science based on holism for that. I blame the discoverers, the perpetrators, and the defenders of a reductionist mechanistic science, a science that doesn’t get off the hook for being destructively amoral. A neutral tool? You are welcome to make your arguments for or against science being the only authoritative tool to determine reality and science being neutral. How the tool is used IS more important than the purpose behind the tool’s making. My point is that the purpose of the tool was to give humans power over nature. Our power over nature is inherently destructive.
Humans behave cognitively as if we are above animals. We believe that human nature is special, that we have a destiny, that we have risen above fate and contingency, even that we are proof against these. This view of ourselves as above nature (super natural) is Promethean madness,in my opinion. Lip service is paid to Darwin, but real service is paid to our power to destroy the biosphere. We live in almost complete denial of our animal nature and denial of our ecocidal behavior. We support business as usual, politics as usual, the status quo. Science, knowledge, power does not get a pass. More probably a fail.
If I believe “everything happens for a reason” that can be taken as simply a trite statement to deny that contingency even exists. I’m skeptical of such a belief. Or have I, as the writer of the gospel of John, elevated reason (logos, the Word) into the fabric of the creation of all things?