Science is humanity’s greatest tool for understanding the world. It has revealed the age of the universe, the structure of DNA, the mechanisms of disease. Its methods—observation, hypothesis, experiment, revision—have proven remarkably powerful.
But science has limits. Recognizing them is not anti-scientific. It is the beginning of wisdom.
The Domain of Science
Science investigates empirical claims—statements that can, in principle, be tested against observation. “Water boils at 100°C at sea level” is empirical. We can check it. Scientific knowledge accumulates because claims can be verified, refined, or rejected based on evidence.
This method works extraordinarily well for questions about how the physical world operates. It struggles with questions that are not empirical in nature.
Five Questions Beyond Science
1. Questions of Value
Is democracy better than authoritarianism? Is it wrong to eat animals? Should we prioritize equality or liberty?
Science can inform these debates—telling us the consequences of different choices—but cannot resolve them. Value questions require philosophical argument, not just empirical data.
2. Questions of Meaning
What is the meaning of life? Why is there something rather than nothing? What makes a life well-lived?
These questions are not about how the world is, but about how we should interpret and relate to it. They require frameworks that science does not provide.
3. Mathematical and Logical Truths
That 2 + 2 = 4 is not an empirical discovery. It is true by virtue of the meanings of the terms involved. Logic and mathematics provide the scaffolding for scientific reasoning, but are not themselves scientific claims.
4. The Foundations of Science Itself
Why should we trust induction—the inference from past observations to future expectations? Why do mathematical equations describe physical reality? Why is the universe comprehensible at all?
These are philosophical questions about the conditions that make science possible. They cannot be answered by science without circularity.
5. Consciousness and Subjective Experience
As explored in my essay on the hard problem, the qualitative character of experience—what it is like to see red or feel pain—may not be reducible to physical description. Science can correlate brain states with reports of experience, but explaining why there is experience at all may require new frameworks.
The Temptation of Scientism
Scientism is the belief that science is the only legitimate source of knowledge—that questions not answerable by empirical methods are meaningless or unanswerable.
This view is self-undermining. The claim that “only scientific claims are meaningful” is not itself a scientific claim. It is a philosophical position, and not a very good one.
A richer view recognizes multiple sources of knowledge: empirical investigation, logical analysis, philosophical reflection, and perhaps aesthetic and moral intuition. These methods illuminate different aspects of reality.
Integration, Not Competition
The goal is not to diminish science but to situate it properly. Science tells us how the world works. Philosophy helps us understand what the world is, what we should do, and how we should live.
We need both. A person who knows everything science has discovered but has never reflected on meaning, value, or consciousness is missing essential dimensions of human understanding.
The world is larger than any single method can capture. Recognizing this is the beginning of intellectual humility—and the doorway to wisdom.