Tackling the Unanalyzable

Although my major would possibly indicate otherwise, I was saddened to see to what lengths members of the scientific community have gone to try and prove that only things shown by experimentation could count as truth. It is a common theme of most aspects of science that the truth is sought through experimentation and research, but to use it as a weapon against other media of plural truth-finding seems to go against the point of science in the first place. If these reductive naturalists claim to defend truth, they only seem to want to defend their brand of truth. They seem to be perfectly fine with finding a cure for cancer so humans won’t suffer its physical malice and experience physical pain, but since grief is harder to test and calculate that doesn’t factor into the pursuit. Lynch mentioned earlier the vast difference between the approaches toward the same goal and what they entail, and I agree with his pluralistic view that it’s possible to place value on truths in which we cannot experiment.
Perhaps the fact that we know of “good” and “bad” things and place value upon them is because we actually do have an intrinsic cognitive reason for doing so. Lynch criticized Moore for saying that good is unanalyzable, but the fact that we are aware of it means that it had to have come from somewhere in our minds. Perhaps it is possible to approach this scientifically. Since we today are aware of “good” things, and value truth as one of those good things, maybe it means that we have encoded, through millions of years of evolution, to have a correlation to “goodness” with other adjectives such as “yellow” or “warm.” It might be the case that as human beings, we cognitively strive for what is good and truth falls into the category of what is good. Although we’re not always motivated to strive for this at all times of our waking day, we have a frontal lobe that allows us to make deep, rational decisions about “good” and “bad” things. Clearly, someone somewhere had to be the first human who had thoughts about what was really the truth and what was really good, so this search has become evolutionarily important to our survival. Even though we don’t always do what we think we should do, we should still pursue the truth, and to do so, we need to be able to recognize it. To say things like love and kindness don’t exist due to their lacking testability is selling our brains very short.