The Double Refuge 🔬 Science & Mystery

Possible Explanations

To one who has faith, no explanation is necessary. To one without faith, no explanation is possible. —Thomas Aquinas

This aphorism gets at key differences between belief, disbelief, and doubt. For believers, the first part of the aphorism — To one who has faith, no explanation is necessary — has been true since the end of the late Classical Age, and continues to be true to this day. It suggests that faith doesn't need to be explained in any way — not by the logic of Augustine or Aquinas, and not even by a biblical chronology that starts in 4004 BC. In this lies the enduring quality of the statement: if it doesn't matter whether or not faith can be explained, faith can't be explained away.

The second half — To one without faith, no explanation is possible — is trickier to get at, and looks different depending on whether you’re an atheist or an agnostic. For most atheists, a scientific explanation for the meaning of life has not only become possible; it’s also become inevitable. Paradoxically, the scientific explanation — which historically has featured geology and astronomy, evolution and DNA — is almost an article of faith among atheists. This is hardly surprising, since science offers the most reasonable explanation we’ve got.

While almost all atheists believe in science, not all scientists are atheists. Some are agnostics, and some are believers. This suggests the immense power of science and the scientific method. You can believe that everything comes together and has meaning, or you can not believe that, science will remain the same.

While the scientific method is respected by theists and atheists alike, it’s closest to agnosticism: both share a radical sense of doubt and a perpetually open mind to all possibilities. For agnostics and scientists, proof is contingent on the moment and is always subject to further verification. The scientific explanation holds for now, but there might be another order of explanation. What that might be, no one can say. Religions, myths, science-fiction, and scientific theories hint at possibilities, but none of these are as solid as the scientific method itself.

Yet still, for open agnostics and open theists the scientific explanation lacks a certain ils ne savent quoi. It speaks to the head, but has less to say to the heart. It’s powerful in terms of a coherent epistemology, but less powerful in terms of a liveable phenomenology. It’s clearly the most reasonable explanation we’ve got, but double refugees still wonder, Could there be more? 

🔬

Next: 🔬Dante’s Journey

Back to Top

Contents - Detailed Contents - Core Beliefs - Overview