Can an explanation really be derived?

If I'm not mistaken, one of the foremost goals of science, if not the sole purpose, is to explain how the universe works. To explain its behavior, scientists deem it appropriate to discover a purely mechanistic set of laws and components whereby all constructs in the universe abide. Scientists reject the idea that God commands them to act, so that they can attribute their behavior on the lowest level to the simplest elements possible. Nevertheless, if the mechanistic nature of the universe in its totality is fathomable for humans, then its levels of composition being finite, the behaviors of the things they seek to explain must ultimately be reduced to elements that are irreducible. And herein lies the problem. If everything in the universe can be explained in terms of fundamental elements, a mystery remains as to the behavior of those elements. It would therefore be impossible for science to fulfill its goal, and we would then need a philosophical or theological explanation.

Can an explanation be derived for what from what?We can't tell if you want a debate based on science or theology. You've provided no evidence or reasoned argumentation for anything you've said and I'm not sure what you're trying to say.In my opinion, you need to participate in current threads before trying to start a topic of your own.I'm not inclined to promote.AdminPD

Forgive me for not being clearer. I intended the paragraph itself as a brief argument. If you'll give me a second reading, I'll try to explain it better terms.My claim is that scientists will one day reach a point where they can no longer decompose objects into simpler parts or explain their behavior in terms of simpler forces. This is because scientists claim that we have the capacity to understand how the universe works, and consequently, the levels of composition of objects both on the largest and smallest scales are finite in number. If scientists reduce everything in terms of the simplest objects and forces, they still have not explained the power behind the being of those objects or forces. Therefore, they will have to resort to philosophy or theology to explain it. Science is concerned with the physical world, but the power behind the existence of a physical world is clearly not physical. Otherwise, scientists will have to do what they judge Christians for, and that is explaining things simply by saying it is just so. This is why I ask whether science can provide a satisfying explanation for the universe.I hope that is clearer. Forgive me if it's not, and I understand if you're not willing to promote because I haven't yet contributed much to other discussions. I'll get to that soon enough.

You have a unique style of writing and I feel it is better for you to interact with the membership before taking on a thread of your own. We can revisit this topic at a later date after you've participated a bit more.This also shows us that you plan to stick around for a serious debate. Some people start threads and leave.I also want you to notice the difference between debating on the science forums and the religious forums.BTW, welcome to EvC.Thanks
AdminPD

You should take your ideas over to The Ultimate Question - Why is there something rather than nothing?, which is addressing this very philosophical question already.