Reply #128: Fruit of labours, so to speak

[cyborg_jim]

The results of scientific inquiry to date certainly say a lot about what science can answer.

Dawkins seems to be saying that, given enough time, science can do anything, even explain our least rational impulses.

That may well be the case. We certainly know a lot already about why we behave the way we do without the need for mysticism - souls, karma, chi - whatever.

The questions that could be scientifically answered in theory but may not be practical include anything in the intractable set of mathmatical problems. That is most certainly where the limits lie - unless someone figures out that P = NP or can construct a computing device that doesn't have this problem.

That seems every bit as deterministic as Calvinism.

If the universe is deterministic that's the way it is. The only Calvinist I've encountered is deeply insane anyway - I'm not sure I could care less if they were happy about this fact or not.