Modern science is a wonderful discovery, the material benefits of which are hard to overestimate. If not for science, there’s a very good chance I wouldn’t be willing or able to live the life I now live, or, more likely, that I wouldn’t be living at all. And more than just these material benefits, science gives us an amazing knowledge of the physical universe. Without wishing to minimize these benefits, I want to point out that science has its limits.

I think in part because it’s so beneficial, some people go too far by adopting a philosophical view called scientism which says that (S) if something can’t be scientifically proven, then it shouldn’t be believed, or is unknowable, subjective, or meaningless. First, this is self-defeating: just ask yourself, can S be scientifically proven? Obviously not. But then it follows that you shouldn’t believe it, can’t know it, or whatever. Second, scientism undermines science since science depends on assumptions which themselves can’t be scientifically proven, such as the proposition that the one-way speed of light is constant.

Third, there are obvious examples of things we know to be objectively true that can’t be scientifically proven. Here are four examples:

1. Logical truths like, “If all men are mortal, and Socrates is a man, then Socrates is mortal”
2. Mathematical truths like 2 + 2 = 4
3. Moral truths like, “It’s wrong to torture and rape a little girl for fun”
4. Aesthetic truths like, “The sunset is beautiful”