iai plus banner

channels

Philosophy for our times: cutting edge debates and talks from the world's leading thinkers

The Limits of Science:

The boundaries of science & human knowledge

Enjoying this video? Why not to get exclusive and unlimited access to all our content.
Already have an account? .
To continue watching, to get exclusive and unlimited access to all our content.
Already have an account? .
You have watched your monthly limit of videos. to view an unlimited number of videos and articles.
Already have an account? .

This Debate

Stephen Law, James Le Fanu, Rupert Sheldrake.

No one can doubt that science is our most powerful means to intervene in the world. But does science uncover the ultimate nature of the world? Do we hide from the limitations of science or are we attracted by the inexplicable because it makes us feel more human? Are the boundaries of knowledge, physics or philosophy comforting us and allowing us to wonder at the mysteries of the universe?

The Panel

Controversial biologist and author of The Science Delusion, Rupert Sheldrake, and physician James Le Fanu debate the limits of knowledge with Think editor and philosopher Stephen Law.

Jump to what you want to see in the debate
  • Rupert Sheldrake
    The Pitch
    Materialism has become an ideology hindering understanding
  • Stephen Law
    The Pitch
    People exploit the limits of science to protect their beliefs
  • James Le Fanu
    The Pitch
    Limits of science highlight unsolvable problems such as infinite diversity
  • The Debate
    Theme One
    The unknowable
  • The Debate
    Theme Two
    Is the knowable universe hypothesis necessary?
  • The Debate
    Theme Three
    The unscientific method
Join the conversation

to post comments or join now (only takes a moment). Don't have an account? Sign in with Facebook, Twitter or Google to get started:

Tachikoma on 12/03/2013 2:29pm

Science is a useful tool for modelling the world and its phenomena, but it can never provide an 'understanding' the world. Unless we mistake models of ever increasing complexity for a world more completely understood? The dominion of science is not the same as that of philosophy....

Macrocompassion on 12/03/2013 1:39pm

The philosopher who thinks that the limitations of science are not suitable for modelling has not applied himself to solving scientific problems of the physical kind. Indeed all of science is expressed in terms of physics not phylosophy and as such it can only be understood by our limited way of thought in terms of a model. To claim that this is untrue is to loose touch with what science is which involves very seriously what we regard as reality. This may be difficult to grasp since it does require some philosophical thought too, but at heart our reality is something we must be able to visualize and that means models. When did you last envisage the big-bang without the need for thinking of a small hot mass? The end of science is similar.

Copy and paste the code below to embed or link to this video.

Embed:
Embed options
Link:
  • Video Seek
    Converted to a link which jumps to that point in the video
    Example: 00:34
  • Bold Text
    Example: [b]Bold[/b]
  • Italic Text
    Example: [i]Italics[/i]
  • Underlined Text
    Example: [u]Underlined[/u]
  • Website link
    Link to another website or URL
    Example: [url]http://www.website.com/[/url]

Rate this talk with three clicks. You can choose 3 words, or vote for the same word 3 times.

Why register with the iai?
  • All you can watch
    Unlimited access to hundreds of hours of debates and talks from the world's leading minds, all for free.
  • Have your say
    Join the iai community and engage in conversation and debate around the issues that matter.
  • Hear it first
    Be the first to hear about our video releases, articles and tickets to our festival HowTheLightGetsIn.