Q: Why is the scientific method not a comprehensive method of deciding validity/truth?
A:
it starts from the assumption that information about reality is valid only if its empirically verifiable (with measurable (according to the capacity of our instruments) physical effects) and repeatable (relatively constant/stable). These are 100% valid assumptions for certain purposes (like most of the purposes science is used for) but they are assumptions based on a very limited definition of the word “real” — a definition heavily informed by biological necessity and we equate the explanatory power of science within a certain domain (the one we live most of our conventional lives immersed in) with its inherent truth… which is again another assumption.
What i don’t realize is actually how you’re not really much more well-liked than you might be right now. You’re very intelligent. You realize therefore considerably relating to this subject, made me personally consider it from so many varied angles. Its like women and men aren’t fascinated unless it is one thing to do with Lady gaga! Your own stuffs nice. Always maintain it up!