What does life do outside of science?

To inform, yes--in the sense of "help." One might use an analogy from some literary study. Suppose we discovered some ancient poem. We could use scientific methods to perhaps determine the date and origin of the work, by analyzing the ink and paper. The date and origin helps us to understand the work, but there would be a great deal of interpretation--non-scientific in nature--that would have to be done in order to write up our study on the poem. The overall judgment about the poem would by helped by science but would not be scientific, in the same way that our overall moral judgment about some matter might be helped by science but would not be scientific.This message has been edited by robinrohan, 09-12-2005 07:42 PM

How well each article supported their points is a non-scientific analysis. Therefore, your conclusion is non-scientific.You have learned about cells, but your learning, though the subject matter is scientific, is in itself a non-scientific procedure.

Most of what we care about is outside the scientific method. Does my wife love me, or not? Can we do a mind-probe on her and find out for sure?Is the work I do worth a damn? Can we put that in a lab and find out?Am I a good person? Any way to quantify that?Have I done anything worth while on this earth?

Have I done right by my children?Should I take this job or not?Am I a fool?What should I cook tonight?Do I look good in this outfit?Should I attend this meeting?Why don't I have any luck?Am I attractive?Should I vote for this candidate?Is life really worth living?Should I pull the trigger, or not?

That makes them unscientific. Otherwise, anyone with scientific knowledge could answer them. Nonetheless, such questions cover a large area of our lives.

That's common sense, not scientific method.