My Concern is rather that we are apt to overlook the limitations of science In replacing religion as the final source of knowledge in popular estimation, science begins to look a bit like another religion itself. With this comes a similar danger on the part of some of its adherents of blind faith in its principles and, correspondingly, to intolerance of alternative views. ...snip...
For example, though we have been aware of human consciousness for millennia, and though it has been the subject of investigation throughout history, despite scientists' best efforts they still do not understand what it actually is, or why it exists, or how it functions, or what is its essential nature. Neither can science tell us what the substantial cause of consciousness is or what its effects are. Of course, consciousness belongs to that category of phenomena without form, substance or color. It is not susceptible to investigation by external means. But this does not mean such things do not exist, merely that science cannot find them.
Should we therefore, abandon scientific inquiry on the grounds that it has failed us? Certainly not?
The Dali Lama, The Quest for Human Happiness.
Pages 11 & 12, The Essential Dali Lama,
This is really a beautiful essay, and I recommend you read it in its entirety.
And as the Dali Lama said, it is certainly not my intention to convince you that we as a society or individuals should abandon scientific inquiry. Rather I would say, merely to remind the reader that although science is capable of describing a band of the overall spectrum of reality in stunning detail, it is not (so far) able to describe the whole of reality, and its inability to deconstruct consciousness into component elements is merely the most elegant example of sciences limits.
Certain human experiences simply speak to an energetic level of reality that science has not yet penetrated in its inquiry. Sometimes these are Hauntings, sometimes they are energetic healings, sometimes these are the visions of mystics, and sometimes these are the results of Divination. There is an underlying arrogance to the view, that none of these things is truely real, that those persons who have reported them through out the ages where simply primitive and naive, and those who report them now, are simply gullible.
For a long time Scholars in the field so Medieval studies wrote of the Trebuchet as an obvious Myth and Exaggeration, but surely such a powerful and destructive engine was beyond the technology of Medieval world. That is until an engineer, a man with the appropriate background to work out the technical problems, became fascinated with the idea of the Trebuchet, and built one. Suddenly the seeming mythological machine was quite real. Long story short, we simply are not the greatest thing since sliced bread, and simply because we cannot imagine in the present moment how our ancestors accomplished something, does not mean it was not accomplished.
If the Great Pyramid had been swallowed up by the desert sands, and all that remained to remind us of it glory where literary accounts, can you doubt that it would be written off as Myth and exaggeration? As it stands, confronted with its obvious reality, we have NO satisfactory explanation for the manner of its construction. We only know it does exist, and that it was obviously built, but how those massive stones where manipulated we do not know. The Ancient Astronaut School points out that in order to build the Pyramid in the lifetime of Kufu, one stone would have had to been put in place every 20 seconds, and we can be quite sure that did not happen. The conventional Archeological establishment just rolls its eyes at the suggestion of outside intervention by advanced beings. With some justification, we don't have Annunaki Black & Decker's laying around the work site. ;). The simple truth is,
I am merely pointing out there are observable limits to our knowledge, and our collective lack of humility does not help. For the purposes of this collection of essays, I do mean to try to seek that balance. To give science its due, in its area of excellence, the observation of the physical world. At the same when our explorations lead us into the energetic world, recognizing that science is simply not an appropriate lamp to guide our exploration.
For reasons I have outlined elsewhere I consider myself an empiricist, and will endeavor always to ground our exploration in the report of our senses. That is the foundation of our epistemology, for the purposes of our time together.
Ama tu ANKI, BB.