Cornelius Agrippa:
Science is not a collection of facts, it is a method. There are limitations to this method, that is, areas of human experience that do not yield to the scientific method, such as ethics and aesthetics. Of course scientists do look at these areas, but as it were from the outside – that is, we may be able to say something about how a sense of beauty evolved, but that enquiry will not lead us to the experience of beauty. On the other hand, if there are ‘secret vibrations’ that manifest physically then there is no reason in principle why scientific method should not be one valid way of investigating them.
Me:
As long as science looks to ethics, aesthetics and pathos from the outside, not penetrating deeply into these perennial matters, as long as Beauty and the Imponderablity of Life is left aside as “secondary”, then this very “method” of investigating is nothing but shallow undertaking, vanity and felony hidden behind grandiloquent terms and overblown achievements.
So how can Method investigate things that totally surpass Its conditioned frame of
perception…?
http://julienmatei.com/2012/12/09/questions-to-you-an-excerpt-from-an-earlier-post/
