Science and Humanities

I am a science major.  I am a science double major. I do not like things that have no wrong answers; I like for there to be a right and a wrong.  I have taken literature classes that asked me to “analyze,” meaning, “Say whatever you feel like and come up with examples to fit your opinion.”  As much as I enjoy reading literature, how many times have I said to myself, “I can’t believe this stuff I’m making up is going to be counted ‘valid.’ This is why I am a science major”?

Recently I’ve decided that science is no more definite than any subject in the humanities.   What does science ask you to do?  Observe phenomena and form a thought around it⎯as long as you have facts to back it up, your thoughts will be deemed worthy of publication.  The only difference between this and the above literature paper is that most times in science, you use numbers to back up your opinion.  But how reliable are numbers, these arbitrary things that we’ve invented?  How reliable are measurements?  We strive for ideal situations, ideal measurements, but we don’t ever get to it.

Science prides itself on its testability, on its ability to be failed.  This is how Newton’s Laws of Motion were proven flawed, and the Continental Drift Theory remains a theory.  There may be wrong answers in science, but there are no right answers.

Whether you look to science or humanities, you never get both right and wrong.  God (along with other religions... yes, I've just called my Father a religion) does provide the answers of right and wrong, and I believe that’s one of the main reasons that people look to Him.  Adam and Eve ate from that Tree of Knowledge… looks like the result is our never-ending efforts to understand science and humanities alike.