By whose authority...?

There are in the life of a human being many more truths which are simply believed than truths which are acquired by way of personal verification. Who, for instance, could assess critically the countless scientific findings upon which modern life is based?

- John Paul II, 1998

Who indeed? Everyone, including scientists, relies on others for the overwhelming majority of information they accept about the way nature works.

What John Paul II was trying to get at, I believe, in the part of his 1998 encyclical Fides et Ratio from which this quote comes, is that in the process by which we search for truth--all truth--we entrust ourselves to knowledge acquired by other people. This is inescapable, as we were born into a family and a society; we are not alone. From birth, we are immersed in traditions and truths which are believed almost instinctively. As we grow, or if we want to grow, we critically evaluate what we've been taught and any other truth claims which may come our way. Nevertheless, there simply are too many truths to personally verify. We depend on someone (in fact many someones) for a starting point from which to inquire. We do not, for better or for worse, start from scratch. Should we give up critically evaluating? Certainly not. Then where do we start? I suppose with the most important questions one has.

The undeniable triumphs of scientific research and technology are testaments to the scientific system of acquiring knowledge and are one reason I am devoted to the system. Bottom line: it works! One of the best things about it is that "heretics" will be rewarded if they can prove their case. In other words, as far as the system is concerned, there are no cherished orthodoxies--there is no dogma which cannot be overturned if the evidence points elsewhere.

Scientific truth is always open to revision, and this is its strength.

Is the scientific method the only way by which we seek truth? I do not think the Pope was equating scientific and religious truth. One could consider that there are different modes of truth. There are those, perhaps the majority, that depend upon immediate evidence or are confirmed by experimentation. This is the mode of truth proper to everyday life and to scientific research. All is good and well. But this is not all truth--and don't think I'm getting spooky. There are also philosophical truths, attained by powers of the human intellect, which shape a comprehensive vision of the world and may provide an answer to life's meaning. Closely related, we might say, are religious truths, which are to some degree grounded in philosophy, and in which the different religious traditions offer answers to ultimate questions.

Are questions in this last category obtained by the scientific system of knowing? Or are they decided by other considerations, e.g., philosophical ideas which, for one reason or another, we find "ring true"?