Creativity is _________________ filling in the blank.
I may have to disagree with you as to wheehtr or not how we are here is a scientific question. First. When you say how we are here I take it you mean how the universe as a whole is here. The question of how we (homo sapien mammals) are here is indeed a scientific question. But the question of how the universe is here perhaps more famously phrased as why is there something rather than not is not a scientific question. To explicate why the one is scientific while the other is not, we best put forward a list of criteria by which we can demarcate what is scientific and what is not. One important criteria, I believe, is that of observation. Science is observable. It operates off of observable data and observable experiments with observable results. Once the scientist has such data it produces a theory or postulate. This theory or postulate should be able to do two things. It must make sense of current data, and (and this is the really important bit) it must make predictions as to what we should expect to see in the future. That bit about the future is what makes science reliable. If a theory can predict future phenomena it survives; if it cannot, it is replaced by one that can. Now. Is the question as to why is there something rather than not observable? Do we have any sense data or phenomena from outside of the universe? No we do not. In fact, the problem is worse. Not only do we not have date from beyond our universe, it appears we cannot have such information. The question of why is there something rather than not is not scientific, it is metaphysical. Thus it is the realm of philosophy and theology. True, many scientists will put forth theories or hypotheses as to the reason the universe is here rather than not, but if they are honest, they will admit that they are proffering philosophical arguments, not scientific ones.
Your email is never shared.Required fields are marked *