by Orestes J. Gonzalez

Created on: March 02, 2009   Last Updated: February 04, 2012

Regardless of whether they are scientists or not, those who reach the existence of God by rational inquiry, reach it on the basis of grounds which are ultimately beyond the domain of science. This article will explain why scientific categories, assumptions, and procedures are inadequate tools to prove the existence of God.

It is to be noted first that the clear distinction drawn today between science, philosophy, and religion is widely recognized as one of "the most characteristic cultural achievement of modern times" ("Symposium on Science, Philosophy, and Religion: God and the Professors," in "The M. J. Adler Archive," accessed 20 January 2012).

These three broad categories of knowledge are radically different in the objects known as well as with respect to the methodologies they use.

Modern science is characterized (a) by careful and abundant observation and experiment, and (b) by the generalization of the results into formulated laws and statements. Modern science comprises many branches but despite the diversity of fields, scientific research makes use of the common logic of the scientific method.

Today, one cannot fail to recognize that the 'unreasonable' effectiveness of mathematics in scientific research is a point beyond contention. Among the many features of scientific inquiry, it is the alliance of the scientific method with mathematics that most clearly defines modern scientific research. Method and measure are the code of discipline for the scientist. (1)

The methodology of philosophy, on the other hand, is not confined to objects of sense-experience as is the methodology of science and technology. Philosophical reasoning is able to rise from the empirical realm to the theoretical and thus provide an array of metaphysical notions which then become useful tools for the apprehension of the truth.

The basic assumptions that the material world is comprehensible and that all material existents bear within themselves the mark of intelligibility, are truths that enjoy metaphysical certitude because these truths constitute a solid and rigorous support for the process of reasoning to begin, for it to achieve full realization, and for it to avoid self-destruction.

Philosophy differs from science in that the first principles of sound philosophical knowledge are metaphysical principles, and metaphysics is valid knowledge of both sensible and suprasensible being.

With the methodology of sound philosophy it is possible to draw out some fundamental aspects of

• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• 6
• Next Page >>