Science is (like) man- controlling by nature

I agree with Holdrege on many levels. I often emphasize that scientific theories are by definition not facts. Theories are guesses that are hopefully plausible and should be based on some research. Their creators claim that science provides deeper insight into naturally occurring thing but in reality scientific explanations only create artificial things. I will admit scientific explanations do provide a sense of comfort and control. Although I will never be able to guarantee my life or the life of my loved ones, I gain a level of reassurance from hearing a man in a white coat explain to me why the death of someone occurred. This is true even if I do not understand the explanation! I find comfort because the explanations are crafted by humans; and I am human. Scientific explanation is primarily useful as a coping mechanism for the ego. If I can explain it in my own terms, I have founded it, created it, invented it and mastered it! It is in this wise that I understand the concept of “delicate empiricism” and the idea that man seeks to become “utterly identical” with natural phenomena he experiences. I agree with Holdrege that scientific explanation should adapt itself to higher forms of knowing and not seek to encapsulate phenomena in limited paradigms. While this can (and does) lead to higher levels of understanding; in the end, scientific theory will always serve to confine the abstract. Even philosophy and its proverbial question, “what is the meaning of life?” does little more than present questions that if answered place confines on the abstract.