99
Even when they are using speech they know because the spoken words react inside. We have to realize that the world is a very mysterious place. It isn’t quite what we think it is. People nowadays think we know all about it because of what science tells us, but science is all on the other side of the “black box”. So we don't really know much. People assume the world exists in a certain manner because they learn what effect comes from causes. They see something happening here, and they see the results here. Having worked out a theory to explain why that is, they then predict that if you do this you should get that. They find it works like that. Finding that, they feel confident that their theory is correct, but it isn’t necessarily correct. All they know is that using that theory they can get certain results from those causes. They then go on to evolve that theory by trying different things. They have to modify it gradually, making it more and more useful and correct, until eventually they get a very powerful thing that can tell us which results come from which causes. Because it seems so effective, people feel that it must be correct. In fact it’s only correct because of the method that was developed. It’s a case of the survival of the fittest. Looking at survival of the fittest in terms of life, many interpretations can be put on it. Many branches of life can be analyzed using that same method. So why shouldn’t the same thing happen in scientific theory. Why shouldn’t there be any number of possible interpretations? It happens that a scientific theory has gone along a certain line because some people got the idea it worked in that way. Later they modified it to cover other instances. Then somebody else got the idea that it worked in other ways as well, until it gradually evolved into a very effective theory. Even then, nobody actually knows the truth of science. All we know is that science seems to work in its own sphere. One of the fundamental assumptions in science is that the senses tell us real things, that our senses give us a true representation of what's there. But even that is very difficult to discuss because when you try to work out what is a “true representation”, you find there is no way to define it at all. The whole thing is entirely up in the air. The exceptions to the “rule” are always explained away. When something doesn’t fit, science says there is something wrong with the experiment.