"In its most distilled form, science (and especially mathematics) provides a certain temptation toward pristine and unvarnished truth that I have never experienced anywhere else–unfortunately, some have taken this to mean that science provides the complete vision of what truth can be and so we’d better get used to it. At least in its present form, science does not do that, because I have had enough glimpses of it through other methodologies to know that science, at least in its common naive sense, is not sufficient.
"The better answer, at least from
those who see what a mess science is and has always been, is that
“science” is a broad enough methodology to encompass these other
methodologies as well, if the criteria of science are restricted to what
seem to be its core essentials: fallibilism, skepticism, and provisionality.
(You could say humility and modesty, except that these traits are often
applied without much of either.) More and more I see these traits in
most of my favorite literary authors, and I also see their absence in a
great many writers I disdain."
- David Auerbach