My only opposition to science is where it claims to have the only answers or the only way of finding answers. I have great respect for the scientific methodology and its achievements within the limitations of its paradigm. I take the same view of religion.
Both are systems which are limited by their mindset but which, each in their own way, offer valuable insight and some answers and many more potential answers as a result.
Many of the supporters of science say it would be a bad idea to accept anything without rigid testing. But this means rigid testing as defined by the current scientific materialistic and mechanistic mindset and I would say that while that can work in some instances, it cannot work in all.
The fact that a materialistic, mechanistic mindset cannot adequately ‘test’ everything is a reality and to dismiss things which do not fit into that narrow belief system is not only unwise, it is irresponsible.
Two often the defenders claim that there are ‘two’ approaches on this issue – that of questioning and that of trusting. I question everything and the only ‘trust’ I exercise is in a belief that one needs to keep an open mind and that more often than not, everything works as it should. Life is a process, not an absolute. I have no faith either. I take what is of value from religion, just as I take what is of value from science, but I am an acolyte of neither.
What I believe is sourced in a process of discovery and change where one applies common sense, logic, reason and personal experience to the ‘pot’ and arrives at conclusions which may be temporary or may be permanent.
The world and everything in it has more ‘grey’ than ‘black or white’ and both the religious and the scientific systems think in terms of absolutes and are therefore found wanting as the source of many answers.