Thread: We got to discuss the very thought-provoking "Grand Inquisitor" chapter from "The Brothers Karamazov" in my reading group of four last week and had a rather heated debate about faith, religion and science for almost two hours.

I was vociferously arguing against my friend’s assertion that both religion and science make the pretext of answering the One Big Question. My argument was that while science does believe there should be some ultimate truth underlying reality, most scientists are not after it.

It is thus incorrect to argue that both religion and science are about "faith". Scientists do have some faith in nature working according to fundamental laws, but this faith is provisional, they are not wedded to it and they would change their minds in the face of evidence.

More importantly, even if scientists believe there might be some ultimate truth, they are humble and always regard this truth as provisional. And crucially, they don't feel frightened by this uncertainty and lack of knowledge but instead embrace it

Rather, they are just trying to indulge in the pleasure of solving problems. Most scientists are like ants and frogs rather than eagles, probing specific scientific corners and jumping between them. Some like Einstein do end up soaring like eagles, but even they start out as ants