"The ultimate triumph of science"

[Tsyal Makto]

TBH I've always seen Occam's Razor as a bit of a cop-out. I think taking the easy way out isn't always right, or possible, because in a subject like this, there really is no easy way out. How many ToEs are floating around right now?

I'm not sure exactly what you're trying to get me to say, I've already explained what I mean by the existential "why," twice. Well, maybe three times is the charm. The ToE would explain the mechanics of the universe, unify the already defined mechanics of quantum and relative physics. It would be the culmination of outward observation, but it won't answer the other half of the puzzle of the human experience: inward observation. Things like the meaning of life, the mind-body connection, how we should live, souls, afterlives, etc. If you're thinking, or hoping, that a ToE will somehow "kill" philosophy or spirituality, it won't. It may finally put some things like "creation" science to bed, but it won't answer the many other questions that have always encompassed spirituality or philosophy. In fact, they might become more invigorated topics, given how people like in "What the **** do we know?" view connections between science and spirituality.

How do you know a ToE will be such a groundbreaking discovery, that will somehow answer all of our scientific, spiritual, or philosophical questions? What happens if all it does is smooth out the bumps in the equations defining quantum and relative physics? If it is not some Holy Grale, and is just a way to clarify our equations? You seem to assume it will come with a roar, what if it comes with a whimper?

Moco - That's just in the nature of internal self examination, IMO. We are all unique in some way, therefore, our self examinations will all turn out to be somewhat different. Does that invalidate them all? No, the opposite, IMO. It helps paint a wide, beautiful mosaic of how people feel about internal existentialism, about how we feel about the inside half of our existence. A rather elegant way to view life, IMO. Half of reality can be defined for us, the other half, we must define ourselves. Come to think of it, Maybe if this is the case, there may eventually be a definitive answer, no? Maybe the answer of ourselves is in the sum, not the parts.