A fundamental aspect of theoretical physics is the study of the basic laws that govern our world. However, these laws are often taken to be entities in themselves with an independent existence from matter and energy. I myself find it extremely difficult to subscribe to this view due to the asking of one simple question: Does the existence of the laws of nature allow material objects to arise in the form that we know them, or does the existence of material objects cause these laws to arise?
This obviously stresses the question of what it is that theoretical physics is actually examining. Does our understanding of the laws of nature really give us the knowledge necessary to ask questions about the creation of the universe? If these laws are merely the necessary and observable patterns produced by material objects then they do not put us in a position to uncover our origins.
Consider a common tree, if physical laws cause it to exist it will appear to us as a common tree, if the tree exists for reasons currently (and I stress currently) beyond human comprehension then it will, again, appear to us as an ordinary tree.
We cannot know which answer is correct by simply examining physical laws even more, science can never give us any true understanding of the world. It requires the philosopher to take a step back from the forefront of scientific research and investigation and ask the question: “What are we really investigating? Can these investigations gives us any real knowledge concerning reality?”
Consider a clever ape placed in a room with a light bulb. When the light bulb is turned off the room is in semidarkness and it becomes rather difficult to navigate ones way around, when it is switched on the ape will have no such problems. Given that the room starts off in semidarkness, after enough time has passed it is probable that the ape will find the switch which turns on the light and, by complete chance and with no idea of the possible consequences, press it. It will not take this clever ape long to realise that the pressing of the switch governs the amount of light present in the room, and so, if the light is turned off by someone outside of the room, the ape can use his knowledge of the relationship between the switch and the light to counter this action. Now suppose that another ape is placed into the room (this one being less intelligent than the other), on seeing the first apes ability to control the light levels in the room he will, no doubt, think of him as some genius magician capable of controlling the forces of nature, and, compared to his monkey contemporary he certainly is. However, he has just as much an idea of the internal workings of the light and the connection between the bulb and the light as the other ape-none. The ape understands the fact that the light switch works, but he could not so easily tell you why (for the sake of the analogy we shall imagine that apes are capable of speech). This is the role of scientific enquiry, to manipulate and control nature for the betterment of humanity, it cannot give us a sufficient reason for why things are as they are. Therein lies the role of the philosopher.
The times of restless, ancient still
When all did bow to tyrant’s will
And raging beast did stir in mind
Of glowing orb of purest rime,
Who that great God bestowed upon
The ghastly truths of divine One
And how harsh lies of damned deceit
Would make His cattle, kneel and bleat.
How kings and monks would fall on ground
And beg The Lord to let them drown
The men who did not follow creed
Of scriptures law, by human weeds.
And so when angel did learn of
The pointless life and hollow love,
He rose above that smirking Lord
To strike him down for good, for sure.
And yet cruel God did know his flight
With ever-present, burning sight.
That angel fell to fiery deep
Where always cursed to wrongly reap
The souls of men who did not good
Nor either did they take the hood
Of wrongs and sin, but did not accept
The love of Christ who purely wept
For sins that man was meant to bare
If’t truth that some Creator’s lair
Did lie before the dawn of time
And ’twas he that shaped us from the lime.
So then that angel was not damned
With righteous heart of loving lamb,
He was but first to truly see
The wrong shut in His pleasing glee,
For t’world did not stem from a Thing
That’s good and beats it’s glowing wings,
It must then be a that of mad intent,
Confused and wanting back that leant,
The soul breathed into Adam’s mind
Which made him mortal-god enshrined.
Damnation, ’tis for those who hate,
Who kill and maim, do not relate
The law within to loving all,
And gazing ‘pon dull gold, enthralled.