ATHEISM BIHCHIANNA 4
Science leh Sakhua Inkalha Ngaihna (The Problem of Science)
Renaissance a\ang khan
science hriatna lamah khawvelin hma a sawn nasa hle a, science huang hrang
hranga thil hmuh chhuah tharte chuan Kristianten Bible behchhana dik saa an
ngaih liam mai thil tam tak chu a rawn hnawl ta a. Bible sawi chu ring mai lovin,
zawn chhuah duhna lian tak a lo awm ta a ni. Hmuh leh hriat mai theih science
chuan a \anna lam chu a tinghet sauh sauh bawk si. Tunah phei chuan science
hian thil engkim min hrilh thei tawha ngaia sakhaw zirtirnate hnawl ta an tam
ta hle a ni tih kan hria.
Science leh sakhua chu indo, pawm
kawp theih loh; an indona ruamah reng reng Science lam chak ziah leh, science
chuan Pathian hnawl riaua hriatna hi a lian hle a ni. Hemi kawngah hian
Kristiante \han harh a ngai tak zet a. Kan Pathian hian science hi a hnawl a
rinawm loh va, science chuan hma sawn zelin Pathian ropuina a tar lang zel zawk
ang. Harsatna lo awm \hin chu Pathian Thu-in a sawi chin leh Science-in a sawi
chin thliar fel leh hriatna lama kan buai fo hi a ni. Science nihphung
(Philosophy of Science) hriat kan mamawh tihna a ni.
Mi tam zawk chuan Rational Realism an tih, science chuan
thil nih dan tak tak zel sawi maia ngaihna hi an pawm a, pawmnahawm tak pawh a
ni reng a. Ernan McMullin, Richard Boyd, W.H. Newton Smith, leh Karl Popper te
hi hetianga sawitu langsar deuh an ni a. Rational Realism chuan, scientific law
te hi thudik emaw, thudik anga pawm theih hnai ber emaw an ni a; science chuan
thutak zawngin, leilung leh khawvel hi a nihna anga puan chhuah a tum mai a ni,
a ti a. Scientific theory \hatna chu ‘simplicity, clarity, internal and
external consistency, predictive ability, empirical accuracy, scope of
relevance, fruitfulness’ a neih hi a ni, an ti. Rational Realism hi pawm
harsatna awm lo a ni lo. Dika anga ngaih scientific law \henkhat a dik lo tih
hmuhchhuah a ni tawh \hin a; Data
ringawtin a tihfiah zawh loh hi science huang chhungah pawh thil tam tak a awm;
hriatna dik tak, dik lo thei lo, chu a pha bik chiah lo a, ‘dik anga ngaih
theih’ a ni deuh ber; observation/theory \hen hran hleih theih loh a nih
avangin theory-a innghat lo ‘scientific knowledge’ a awm thei meuh lo a ni.
Rational
Nonrealism chuan, ‘Science hian thil nih dan dik tak a phawrh chhuak zo bik
lo va, a thil sawi ang diak diak hi a nih dan a ni chuang lo, a lan dân hnai
ber a sawi mai a ni’ a ti a ni deuh ber. Rational Nonrealism chi hrang hrang a
awm leh a. Phenomenalism chuan, “science asserts that the existence of
observables only, theoretical terms refer to sets of actual or possible sensory
experiences, and laws or theories are summary statements of past sequences of
sensory experience which allow one to predict future series of sensory
experiences,”[1] a ti a ni. Operationism
chuan scientific entities leh laws te chu thil awm rêng ni lovin laboratory-a
tehfung hmanrua ang chauhvah a ngai. Entirnân, thil sei zawng sawina ‘feet’ hi
kan thil teha awm a ni lo va, hmanrua kan siam mai ang hi a ni. Pragmatist
Larry Laudan thung chuan science awm chhan chu theory \angkai, leh \angkai
lehzual hmuh chhuah zel a ni a, thutak zawn chhuah a ni ber lo, tiin a sawi
\hin. A tum ber chu mihringte harsatna sukiang tur theory duan chhuah a ni.
Chuvangin, “Science is rational, not because it is true but because it makes
progress in explaining the world. It works.” Princeton philosopher Bas C. van
Fraassen thung chuan ‘constructive empiricism’ a tih mai chu sawiin, “Science
aims to give us theories which are empirically adequate and acceptance of a
theory involves a belief only that it is empirically adequate,”[2]
tiin science chuan thil hmuh theih china \angkai chauh a tum thu a sawi.
Thomas Kuhn leh a sangawizawnpuiten Nonrational Nonrealism an tih chu
sawiin, science hian a tawpkhawkah chuan awmzia nei lem lovin an ngai hial a.
Science pawh hi ngaihdanin a kaihhruai a ni a, theory inkalh te hi suihrem
theih a ni lo va, \an bik nei lova ngaih science thuneihna pawh hi a buaipuitu
‘pawl’ (scientific community) thua kal deuh mai a ni, an ti a ni.[3]
Mi tam takin science chauh hi hriatna
dik leh pawmtlak pe theituah an ngai a. Thil dang zawng zawng chu ‘ngaihdan’
emaw, ‘rinthu’ emaw ang chauhah an ngai. Science hian phâk loh chin tam tak a
nei tih hriat a \ha. A pâwr zual \anfung, “Only what can be known by science or
quantified and empirically tested is rational and true,” tih pawh hi ‘vawtu êk
cheh’ case bawk a ni. Scientific statement a ni lova, he thu hi science-in a
dikna a tichiang thei lo. J.P. Moreland chuan, “One cannot turn to science to
justify science any more than one can pull onself up by his own bootstraps. The
validation of science is a philosophical issue, not a scientific one, and any
claim to the contrary will be a self-refuting philosophical claim,”[4]
tiin thu fing tak a sawi a ni.
Rational Realist anga science hian
thudik pe zela kan ngaih dawn pawhin, science piahlam a mi ‘science lem lo’ tak
thu \hut beh sa (presumption) kan nei a ni ang. Kan hriatnate (sense organs) te
hian keimahni pawn lam thil hi dik takin min hriattir zel a ni tih kan pawm a
ngai (science-in a prove thei lo); kan ngaihtuahna rilru hi a rinawm tawk a,
khawvel hian kalphung fel tak a nei tih pawm sa a ngai bawk; thudik (truth) hi
mihringte hriat theih a awm tih te hi a \hut bet sa tlat a. Science piahlama
ngaih ‘moral values’ te pawh a keng tel \ûn mai. Entirnân, scientific method
chuan a experiment result report kawngah thu dik tak sawi te a keng tel tih kan
hria. Chuti lovin science chu rintlak a ni thei dawn si lo. Chuvangin, science
pawh amah mai chuan a ding zo chuang lo tih a chiang a ni.
Chuvang chuan alawm, Science ngaihsân
avang maia Pathian awm rin loh hi a finthlak loh a ni. Science-in sakhua a kalh
si lo. Princeton mathematician David Berlinski-an, “If science stands opposed
to religion, it is not because of anything contained in either the premises or
the conclusions of the great scientific theories. They do not mention a word
about God. They do not treat any faith beyond the one they themselves demand.
They compel no ritual beyond the usual ritual of academic life, and this
involves nothing more than the worship of what is widely worshipped. Confident
assertions by scientists that in the privacy of their chambers they have
demonstrated that God does not exist have nothing to do with science, even less
to do with God’s existence,”[5]
tiin amah sakhaw mi tak ni lem lo mah se science hminga miten sakhua an beihna
chu \hiah tumin science-in a thlen theih chin a sawi. USA-a National Academy of
Sciences pawhin, “At the root of the apparent conflict between
some religions and evolution is a misunderstanding of the critical difference
between religious and scientific ways of knowing. Religions and science answer
different questions about the world. Whether there is a purpose to the universe
or a purpose for human existence are not questions for science. Religious and
scientific ways of knowing have played, and will continue to play, significant
roles in human history.... Science is a way of knowing about the natural world.
It is limited to explaining the natural world through natural causes. Science
can say nothing about the supernatural. Whether God exists or not is a question
about which science is neutral,”[6]
tiin a puang zawk hial a ni.
[1] J.P. Moreland, Scaling the Secular City (Grand Rapids,
Michigan: Baker Book House, 1987), 191. Ani ziah tho Christianity
and the Nature of Science (Secunderabad: OM Books, 2007) hi chhiar a manhla
hle a ni.
[2] Bas C. van Fraassen, The Scientific Image (Oxford: Clarendon
Press, 1980), 11.
[3] Hetianga ngai hi
philosopher ropui tak tak Paul Feyerabend, N.R. Hanson, Hilary Putnam te pawh
an ni.
[4] Moreland, Scaling the Secular City, 197.
[5] David Berlinski, The Devil’s Delusion (New York: Basic
Books, 2009), xiv.
[6] Sam Harris, Letter to a Christian Nation, pdf copy,
21.
Comments
Post a Comment