Verified answer

Science already admitted it can never reach a conclusion about the nature of our existence.They have found a blueprint to the beginnings of all life on earth. But how did this blueprint come int existence?In time with a raising of consciousness our five senses will open up to explain more about existence.I don't think Science can be regarded as just an instrument.Another name in an effort to explain 3D reality.

You need both. They both have uses. The trouble with science is that it doesn't go try much to solve politics, sociology, philosophy, diplomacy, human relations and things to do with people. People come in too many sizes to use black and white thinking or use it on more complex problems like that. Maybe they could, but the money isn't there and they don't put the emphasis there.

In dealing with principles it's a matter of generalities and not firm rules, but rules, as in law, have to be applied with wisdom and flexibility to be just. Science seems to deal more with rigid rules and thinking. For instance, I just don't hear scientists talking about justice, compassion or the like. Maybe if there where some grants. I mean even a department of peace can't get through congress, when it seems peace would pay better than war, of does it?