Science, belief and faith

nor sailing. The formula was nice, but completely ridiculous because at a time when it says: “from there I do not have bark nor sailing,” we determine the shore that means the border between the certain and the uncertain. But the same time, when we ask, in the field of knowledge, the share of certain and uncertain, this uncertain becomes certain of the same time! Be sure at this point to eliminate one of the human aspects with as much certainty, it is a fideism affecting naivety. Define nature and supernatural as areas separated by a certain border, this defines the two sides at once, it is automatically ask the religious problem in a manner as foolishly realistic that the problem is natural. But it was, in essence, quite comfortable.

That it is to celebrate or that it is to lament, that is the problem of the nature and of the supernatural, that are thought settled, is a problem we can no longer present because it is completely questioned by the development of sciences called “nature.” Since Einstein, we are a relation to the sciences of nature, in a Total relativity: we know, now, that it is us who are the world, that there is no more substance, more fixed point nowhere. It is awful ! This does not mean that it must be a malign reason, because we have it at our disposal, then we must use it in the smartest way. There is no therefore more neither man nor nature: what we can seize, it is the interrelationship. You understand then that the concept of “nature of sciences” that, by convenience, it must be continue to call it that, it is a concept that today becomes ridiculous, because to speak of sciences of nature means sciences that are abstraction of the manner in which we observe; in other words, this means: sciences which put

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12