[Liberal Classic]

Science is not equipped to derive the meaning of life.

The problem as I see it is that people are demanding metaphysical answers from physical science.

Science is a means, but not an end. It is simply a tool for describing the physical world.

However, it does not by itself answer philosophical questions like ""why are we here?"

I fail to understand why people demand ethical and philosophical answers from the physical sciences. I speculate it may be because of a perceived lack of ethics and morality in today's world that some people are demanding moral and ethical answers from science. But then, this begs the question what is the purpose of faith if your seeking moral answers from science?

Truly, this is mixing up apples and oranges.

[Williams]

I'm not exactly demanding philosophical answers from science. I reacted to those who seem to think science has answered everything and it's all just random physical interactions. Or perhaps that there are no valid philosophical or religious questions, those being a superstitious waste of time by the non emprical.

But if you read about cosmology, particle physics and so on, scientists do end up getting into the big questions, because at a certain point their ability to observe or explain things finds its limits. At that point they either declare something unknowable, or they begin speculations that take on a metaphysical tone. This happens when they get "inside" a black hole, or before the big bang, and they declare that all the rules we observe in this world like time and space vanish. at that point they are describing something they can't measure or understand, and they become very upset if it is suggested taht God or even an "intelligent design" is manifesting itself.

But then intelligent design is a scientific theory, and not necessarily one based on God.