I happened to read an interesting article by Sri. Vikram who introduces himself as a seeker of knowledge. Fascinated by both science and Vedanta, he looks for answers which most of us ask very often such as the following:
# Why did this Universe come into being? Can we find out the causes for its existence?
# Is man endowed with Freewill? This question arises because science rejects the idea of freewill. You will read why and how in his write-up and his own inference of whether there is Freewill or not.
# Does Consciousness exist? How does science view it?
These questions are taken up by him in the article for analysis.
Finally he concludes,
"The domain of freewill and consciousness is perhaps the domain of God. I posit this, because there is no objective way of explaining any of the 3 from a scientific standpoint, yet, in my opinion, our everyday subjective experience corroborates the existence of at least the first two, although science - by its very nature - disallows the possibility for the existence of freewill and it cannot explain consciousness (especially the how and the why). Does this situation render consciousness and freewill any less true? Is my experience of rose's redness an illusion? Was my idea of writing this post predetermined at the time of the Big bang?
or
Is it the case that the scientific means of 'KNOWING' just does not map on to the subjective domain of human 'EXPERIENCE'? I am inclined to believe that it's the latter. If the subjective is exclusive from scientific means of knowing and if people are in relation to God in their subjective space, I don't see why there must be a compulsion to prove the existence of God. God could very well be a reality that perhaps cannot be empirically demonstrated, mathematically proven, or even logically deduced, but only subjectively experienced!"
The complete article can be read at his website: Seeker of meaning
