Science Cannot Answer All Questions
Negative
Resolution: Can science answer all questions?
Definitions:
Theory - A well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world; an organized system of accepted knowledge that applies in a variety of circumstances to explain a specific set of phenomena.
Science - systematic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation and experimentation.
Introduction:
I stand in firm negation of the resolution at hand. I support this with the following two contentions. All I need to do to prove my opponent wrong is to negate the resolution with one example that proves science is unable to produce an answer to everything.
Science cannot answer all questions, because there will always be something unknown and we will make assumptions based on it. Science is limited to assumptions, things that can be observed and repeated through trial and error. Some things simply cannot be explained.
Scientists propose theories stating how they think the world works. This is the best explanation they could come up with at the time, so even though they can find evidence for it, these things change.
Contention 1:
The Big Bang Theory states that the universe was once very hot and dense and expanded rapidly over time. We cannot say that such a theory is wrong, but only say how probable it is. We cannot know for sure if the origin of the universe resulted from a higher being, or even if the universe we live in exists as one of many parallel universes. Science can only give us information that we must speculate upon.
Contention 2:
Consider Darwin’s Origin of Species. We cannot observe animals evolve over time, because the human lifespan is relatively short compared to Earth. We can take what we discover through fossils and genetics to try and make sense of these changes. Darwin developed a reasonable interpretation from his research, but there is always going to be research that will revise his findings, because we never know if the next
Resolution: Can science answer all questions?
Definitions:
Theory - A well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world; an organized system of accepted knowledge that applies in a variety of circumstances to explain a specific set of phenomena.
Science - systematic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation and experimentation.
Introduction:
I stand in firm negation of the resolution at hand. I support this with the following two contentions. All I need to do to prove my opponent wrong is to negate the resolution with one example that proves science is unable to produce an answer to everything.
Science cannot answer all questions, because there will always be something unknown and we will make assumptions based on it. Science is limited to assumptions, things that can be observed and repeated through trial and error. Some things simply cannot be explained.
Scientists propose theories stating how they think the world works. This is the best explanation they could come up with at the time, so even though they can find evidence for it, these things change.
Contention 1:
The Big Bang Theory states that the universe was once very hot and dense and expanded rapidly over time. We cannot say that such a theory is wrong, but only say how probable it is. We cannot know for sure if the origin of the universe resulted from a higher being, or even if the universe we live in exists as one of many parallel universes. Science can only give us information that we must speculate upon.
Contention 2:
Consider Darwin’s Origin of Species. We cannot observe animals evolve over time, because the human lifespan is relatively short compared to Earth. We can take what we discover through fossils and genetics to try and make sense of these changes. Darwin developed a reasonable interpretation from his research, but there is always going to be research that will revise his findings, because we never know if the next