Editor:

I would like to respond to Alex Herskowitz's opinion in his letter, "No truth in equating science with religion," (Feb. 14).

I agree with his explanation of the scientific method; we all learn this process in our beginner biology and chemistry classes in high school. There is much to be said for this process for many reasons, one of which is the obvious benefit this method gives society. Mankind as a whole benefits from truths found through the scientific method. However, mankind also suffers because of theories proposed as truth which are later disproved (Flat world, leeches used in general medicine, etc.). We agree that this method works well in ferreting out untruths, but we must also realize that all the "truths" we have from science that we believe today are subject to the same scrutiny, and many of them will most likely be disproved. Remember that the scientific method discovers its fruits through the eyes and ears, and fingers (touch) of the scientist. These are their senses that gather scientific truth. Scientists place their trust in their personal physical abilities.

You say, "with religion the assumption is that the theory (Bible) is right and cannot be proven wrong." (First realize that the Bible supports only some of the MANY religions of the world.) You are wrong. They realize that man makes mistakes. The translation of scriptures through human effort alone implies the possibility of mistakes being made. So it cannot be said absolutely, without divine confirmation, that "the theory is right and cannot be proven wrong." True religious followers do not base there faith on their holy writ alone. They also use something similar to the scientific method. But because of the senses used (heart, mind, and spirit) and the source of truth, religious followers don't have to believe just in what is written. People who look to religion for truth realize that man is fallible. They realize they will never know all things in this lifetime. This realization does not stop them from searching for truth. While many appreciate the benefits of scientific understanding, they search with their minds and their hearts and look to a perfect, all- knowing source: God. People on this search ask God for answers. The answers they obtain are absolute truth. And the basic principles in religion that are common throughout almost all religions have come from each believer asking individually for this truth and guidance.

While scientists of today learn what has already been discovered by those scientists before them, so do religious believers read and study their scriptures of the prophets who wrote them. Do scientists stop there? No, they try and form new ideas or disprove old ones. Do religious believers stop there? No, they ask an infallible source - God - to let them know if those things are true. Are scientists sometimes wrong? Yes. And sometimes religious believers misinterpret what God has told them. But God (their source), at least, is infallible. Indeed, scientists do follow the religion of science. It is as Ms. Fillerup said, the "truth" in science is subjective. Is it absolutely the truth? That is your opinion.

The beauty of religion is that it accepts ALL ABSOLUTE truths, because of the source by which one can verify. Science cannot and will never be able to accept ALL ABSOLUTE truths, because at least one of them involves an existence of a being they, by their own method, can never prove.

Jason Welker
systems engineering junior