If someone says science can't explain everything what's the best way to repond?

[comet]

I say "yeah, that doesn't mean we can make up anything we want."

[Edwardo Piet]

I'd respond thus:

"With the exception of formal logic and mathematics: science can explain anything worth explaining."

[Minimalist]

And religion claims it can explain EVERYTHING.... which should be a hint about the validity of its claims.

[jebus]

finding the truth its hard and takes time, while inventing things is easy and fast.

[Funky_Gibbon]

I've though about this one a bit. I think what the person, e.g. my parents or somebody in the street, is trying to say is: 1. God of the gaps (they don't know what advancements will happen) and 2. The supernatural is real and "science" can't explain it.

My idea is to simply agree with the person and remind them that, for example, archeology and mathematics are not sciences (maybe philosophy too?) and humanity has learned so much from those two fields. Nobody would claim digging up fossils or human artifacts is a kind of science experiment right? Even within science, some great discoveries are made without the scientific method: You have luck alone and armchair theorizing, as two examples.

Maybe I'm overthinking this and there is a simpler answer. One route a person might go down is to say "there is no way to measure love". In which case, I'll list the hormones associated with love and infer that by measuring those we can be sure a person is in love.

I think the wider question here is that science can't tell you how to live your life.
"Science" is just the scientific method, no more, no less, it's a fantastic thing don't get me wrong, but its just that.
Can't tell you why you should get up in the morning.
Can't tell you the "meaning of life".
I think what a lot of people tire of are people who say they live their life by science. That it's their philosophy - as if by saying this they are automatically more intelligent and rational than the next man. What that translates to, for me, is "I subscribe to a form of logical positivism because I actually have no idea what philosophy is or how it works, and don't have a very imaginative mind."
Much like many religious people really.

[Tonus]

And religion claims it can explain EVERYTHING.... which should be a hint about the validity of its claims.

I think it's AronRa who has the motto that "Science doesn't explain everything, but religion doesn't explain anything."

[Whateverist]

I've though about this one a bit. I think what the person, e.g. my parents or somebody in the street, is trying to say is: 1. God of the gaps (they don't know what advancements will happen) and 2. The supernatural is real and "science" can't explain it.

My idea is to simply agree with the person and remind them that, for example, archeology and mathematics are not sciences (maybe philosophy too?) and humanity has learned so much from those two fields. Nobody would claim digging up fossils or human artifacts is a kind of science experiment right? Even within science, some great discoveries are made without the scientific method: You have luck alone and armchair theorizing, as two examples.

Maybe I'm overthinking this and there is a simpler answer. One route a person might go down is to say "there is no way to measure love". In which case, I'll list the hormones associated with love and infer that by measuring those we can be sure a person is in love.

I think the wider question here is that science can't tell you how to live your life.
"Science" is just the scientific method, no more, no less, it's a fantastic thing don't get me wrong, but its just that.
Can't tell you why you should get up in the morning.
Can't tell you the "meaning of life".
I think what a lot of people tire of are people who say they live their life by science. That it's their philosophy - as if by saying this they are automatically more intelligent and rational than the next man. What that translates to, for me, is "I subscribe to a form of logical positivism because I actually have no idea what philosophy is or how it works, and don't have a very imaginative mind."
Much like many religious people really.

I guess my question for you Mr Gibbon is what importance you place on having something to live your life by.  Does one need a basic principle, a good motto, maybe a key wisdom story in order to make a good life?  Maybe we do, I don't know.  I doubt I have one, I mean just one.  But if I do I'm not sure what it would be.

If you do think it is generally important, how important do you think it would be to live in a community of like minded folk?

[ReptilianPeon]

Perhaps when somebody can show me that the universe we live in actually cares about whether there is life or not I might start thinking about "the meaning of life". I see nothing wrong with concluding that I am, at the simplest level, merely a series of vibrations in the various quantum fields. Life is what we make of it; we start with a blank canvas and it is up to us to decide what happens to it.

Our universe is an extremely dangerous place. And the more complex life becomes, the fewer places it can survive and thrive. Humans can only live in a very specific environment - otherwise they need items such as thick coats, scuba gear or, you know, space suits because practically every part of the universe is inhospitable to humans (only about 4-5% of our universe is ordinary matter, i.e. atoms, and must of that is interstellar/intergalactic gas and dust). The Earth is a microscopic fraction of a seemingly endless and uncaring universe. Our universe will continue to exist even if all humans die because it matters not whether humans are around to appreciate it. Sad I know.

[downbeatplumb]

[quote pid='1372410' dateline='1471935555']

"Science" is just the scientific method, no more, no less, it's a fantastic thing don't get me wrong, but its just that.
Can't tell you why you should get up in the morning.
Can't tell you the "meaning of life".

I am wondering why you think life needs a meaning. I don't think it has one.

I think what a lot of people tire of are people who say they live their life by science. That it's their philosophy - as if by saying this they are automatically more intelligent and rational than the next man. What that translates to, for me, is "I subscribe to a form of logical positivism because I actually have no idea what philosophy is or how it works, and don't have a very imaginative mind."
Much like many religious people really.

That is because you don't understand science. I can tell by your words.

[ProgrammingGodJordan]