1

Ofelia Tamayo

English 1B

Professor Bochettaz

December 5, 2020

Can Science explain reality? Reality are the things in life that are often observed and

verified to exist through experiences. In the text “Beliefs”, Aldous Huxley argues that the

scientific picture of the universe is not complete because it fails to measure reality and

therefore problematic. He states Scientists will only measure the facts from experiences,

rather than the whole experience itself. Due to the success of measuring facts, science has

dominated the physical environment. Science has ignored all other aspects of the world and

focuses on the mathematics, cold hard facts. I agree with Huxley to a certain extent that the

world is portrayed as being meaningless due to these facts that exclude meaning and value.

There is an objective reality out there, but we view it through our beliefs, attitudes, and

values. Due to this, their perceptions and findings are not an accurate depiction of reality.

The text argues that a scientific explanation of something would be incomplete if it

contained doubts that could not be easily addressed. The author claims that a scientific

explanation should be comprehensible. He has highlighted the aspects that run the world, and

they include the human senses, the intuitions that tell the good and the bad, the human

emotions and sentiments and impulses. The scientific picture of the universe does not capture

these aspects, and according to the author, they are the ones that matter the most in describing

the universe because they explain the reality of the world. I believe that the 'man of science'

intentionally left out these aspects of reality about the universe because it was convenient for
 2

him. The techniques used to come up with the scientific picture of the world could not handle

the complexity of explaining the world's reality. 'The man of science' selected only the aspects

that could be measured by mathematical approaches. Through this simplification and

abstraction approach, the 'man of science' managed to understand and explain the physical

environment of the world successfully. I feel that this success should not be celebrated

because it is intoxicating and enshrines illogicalities that many scientists and philosophers

have pointed out. He claims that many scientists and philosophers felt that this explanation

left out reality is reality itself. Science did not and still cannot deal with reality; thus, it

decided to focus on the aspects that could be handled mathematically. This scientific school of

thought has an intellectual error that resulted in the thought that the world is meaningless.

Subscribing to the untrue philosophy has disastrous results, and maybe it is time to embrace

an alternative philosophy that is true and can offer desirable outcomes.

I agree with the author that the scientific picture of the world is not a true representation

of the universe because it has failed to capture the qualitative aspect of human reality. The

world is not just made up of the physical environment; in fact, the aspect that matters more in

the universe is the human aspect, mainly made of emotions, intuition, senses, and sentiments,

purely qualitative aspects (Huxley). In my eyes, if we don't look at the other factors of life

such as relationships, friendships, love, and fulfillment then there is no point in living.

Without these factors life as we know, would have no meaning and wouldn't give us a reason

to live. For example, I live for my family so that gives me a reason to do certain things in

order to connect with them and relate with them. Science does leave out that reality and

feelings can be learned and formed based on an individual’s own experience. For the picture

of the universe to be complete, these aspects must be factored in.

 3

Scholars in arts, religion, and philosophy have tried without much success to explain

and describe the intangible and non-measurable aspects of reality that are entirely qualitative.

From the text, we see that Huxley claims that scientists for long have admitted by implication

that they don't have the competency to discuss matters of the non-measurable realities of the

world. And if this is the case, scientists do not have the moral jurisdiction to claim that their

picture of the world is a complete representation of the world. The author of the text has

soundly presented his argument on why he thinks the world's scientific picture does not

represent the universe's true picture. For instance, he claims that the world does not entail the

physical environment alone, which the world's scientific picture is based on (Huxley). He

states that the world runs on the unseen reality of intuition, emotions, sentiments, senses, and

impulses. All these aspects cannot be measured by scientific or mathematical means, which

science depends on. Based on these facts, the writer managed to develop a strong case against

the world's scientific picture. The writer has been explicit in his argument and has managed to

address most aspects of the 'reality of the world' that the scientific approach did not address.

The writer further strengthens his argument against the scientific picture of the world by

addressing the ability and competency of scientists to explain the unseen reality of the world

guided by emotions and are purely qualitative. The writer cites that from the Galileo era,

scientists have somewhat by implication admitted that they are not qualified to discuss the

non-measurable reality of the world that is purely qualitative (Huxley). By doing this, the

writer has brilliantly managed to challenge the scientists' ability to draw the picture of the

world if they do not comprehend the aspects of the world's non-measurable reality, which is a

major component of the world. Huxley uses the scientists' confession of lack of competency

to discuss the non-measurable reality of life and discredit their argument on the world's
 4

scientific picture. This has helped him validate his claim that the world's scientific picture is

not the true picture of the world. In this context, the author uses both Kairos and ethos. On

Kairos, the author writes that from the Galileo era, scientists have accepted through the

implication that they lack the competency to address the non-measurable reality of the world

(Huxley). In this context, the author is trying to reveal to the audience that the inability of

science to discuss the qualitative reality of life has not started today; it is something that even

the early scientists could not address. He is trying to insinuate to the audience that maybe it is

time they discredited the scientific approach in drawing the picture of the world. On ethos, the

author has written that the scientists proved thorough implication that they do not have the

competency to discuss matters of the world's qualitative reality. Within this context, the writer

is trying to appeal to the audience that scientists lack the intellectual authority to draw the

picture of the world because they lack the competency to address one of the most important

aspects of the world, the qualitative reality.

In an attempt to get sympathy from the audience, the author writes that those who

attempt to link the human qualitative aspect of reality to the universe are accused of being

false scientists, charlatans, and self-advertisers (Huxley). In this context, the writer has used

pathos. The author has used pathos cleverly to persuade the audience to embrace his side of

the argument.

The author has a legit argument; however, the argument has a weakness. He has not

fully addressed the thorny issues. The main reason why the scientific picture of the world did

not include the qualitative aspect of human reality; is because it lacked the appropriate means

to measure the aspects mathematically (Huxley). The author has also failed to provide a

technique for mathematically measuring the universe's qualitative human realities.

 5

I agree with the author, where he claims that life's untrue philosophy can be disastrous.

It risks creating the notion that the world is meaningless (Huxley). Therefore, it is time to

replace the current philosophy of life with a refined one that captures all the aspects of the

universe, especially the qualitative human reality.

In conclusion, it is critical we understand the scientific picture of the universe and how it

can be problematic. Huxley stresses the importance of the unseen reality of the world guided

by emotions that science fails to ignore and could have the ability to measure. I found myself

aligning with him through his strong use of ethos and kairos and can justify that science does

not have the ability to give an accurate depiction of reality.

Works Cited
 6

Huxley, A. "Beliefs." Ends and means: An inquiry into the nature of ideals and into the methods

employed for their realization, Transaction Publishers, 1937.