Non-scientific truth

[tthor]

Maybe a bit over my head, but i'll lay it out simple. Of course science can't answer "What is beautiful" I mean that is relative. Besides, *TWIST COMING UP* Who said that beauty even exists? If science hasn't proven beauty yet then of course it can't prove what is beautiful, dumbass question on his side IMO.

What is beautiful? Actually, it can explain that, using maths of all things.

I believe the answer to your question though is Math

Ok guys, I started college as a math major (I made the tough choice to go to astronomy instead this semester), but I have no idea what you guys are talking about. Math is logic sans context and empirical data. It's the most basic way "things" relate to each other. It can't make statements about objective reality on its own. Can it?

Pastor needs to read The Moral Landscape: How Science Can Determine Morality by Sam Harris.

I've seen Mr. (Dr.?) Harris around a lot lately. He has some interesting ideas and I think he may have actually changed my opinion on objective morality (I now think it's real... sorta). But I disagree with him on a lot of things. I can't tell. But good-on-ya fro bringing him up.

well, i have heard of computers programmed to create original works of art, including paintings and music, so i think we do have a vague idea of what beauty is, from a scientific perspective