The Catholic bulletin. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1911-1995, 1916-01-01
POPULAR APoLooETIcs.
Adapted from the German of Rev
Peter Mikes, S. D., by Rev.
James Watcher.
xxVIll. Exact Science.

XXVIll. Exact Science.
Objection: / respect and acknowl-
edge only the results of exact science,
which are derived from experience
and can again be verified by expert
ence. Philosophical speculations are
only phantasms and empty air. What
wants to pass as science must be
proved; where the proof is wanting
there is no science in spite Of all
imaginations and phrases.
Answer: u agree with the last
assertion. But the question is whether
all proofs must come from experience
and whether science is limited by ex-
perience and experiment. That would
he materialism.
The exact sciences can not get
along with mere experience without
reasoning. What is law of nature?
Not an object of observation, but of
thought, result Of reasoning, based
on reasoning from experience. No
scientist has ever had natural law
under the magnifying glass.
A natural law is therefore specu-
1ation or conclusion of our reason
based on facts. What are the various
hypotheses, the scientific" hypo-
theses, e. G., the mechanical theory
of heat, the theory of light waves, the
hypothesis of ether, the atomic
theory? No scientific investigator
has ever observed, measured, or
counted such things as the ether, the
atoms, etc. They are all speculations
or conclusions of reason, based on
facts, and an attempt to give a
plausible explanation of facts and
phenomena.
True and genuine philosophy does
the same thing: 1t starts from the
facts of experience and draws its con.
illusions. The foundation of true
philosophy is the sum total of ex-
perience, the experience accessible to
every man as we'll as that which can
be attained by scientific investigation.
From this foundation philosophy then
Investigates the connection, the
cause, the end and purpose, the es-
sence of things, and whatever it can
show and prove as sure result OF
thought, it claims to be scientific
result; whatever is not sure, but only
probable, is set forth as only an
opinion. In this process we do not
presuppose anything but what is evil
IDENTIFY true and justified, e. g., that it
is impossible that thing be and not
be at the same time and regard; that
i exist, that | have the faculty to
know the truth, that the whole is
greater than any of its parts, and the
like. All truths that are self-evident.
The difference between natural
science and philosophy is this: Natural
science asks for and investigates only
the immediate cause of phenomena
and things, philosophy, however, the
last and highest cause. Philosophical
investigation generally begins where
science leaves off.
q 1t sounds queer, to say the least,
if infidel scientists demand of us as a
necessary condition Of scientific proof
that we verify everything by. expert
ment. Can biologists cool off the
earth anew from. glowing state
The genesis or beginning of life on
earth is an assured fact of science;
but repetition of this beginning has
been tried again and again without
success. Qui minimum probat, nihil
probat Che who proves too much,
proves nothing), and who demands
800 much is unreasonable. Whatever
is logically deduced from established
facts is just as certain as these facts
themselves, and is therefore scien-
tifcally true and certain. In this way
/. we can prove the existence of per-
sona1 God, the Maker of this world,
as we have seen before.