Question

Is Dr. Shoket doubtful, unsure, fairly confident, optimistic, or certain, that science will eventually be able to answer all the questions that have hitherto generated only philosophical answers? Why or why not?

A) Dr. Shoket is certain, as science has made great strides.
B) Dr. Shoket is fairly confident, given recent advancements.
C) Dr. Shoket is unsure, as some questions may remain philosophical.
D) Dr. Shoket is doubtful, believing science can't replace philosophy.

Answer 1

Dr. Shoket seems to recognize the limitations of science in answering philosophical questions, suggesting a stance of uncertainty about whether science can ultimately address all such inquiries.

Step-by-step explanation:

Dr. Shoket appears to occupy a position that acknowledges the limits of science in addressing questions that have traditionally only yielded philosophical answers. The nature of classic philosophical questions, such as 'Is it possible to know anything?' and questions regarding morality, aesthetics, or spirituality, are outside the scope of empirical science. This is because science deals with material phenomena that can be observed and measured. Considering the nature of skepticism and the understanding that certainty is a very strict measure of justification, it seems that Dr. Shoket might be more inclined to recognize the role of science in extending our knowledge while also acknowledging its limits. Thus, the most fitting option would be C) Dr. Shoket is unsure, as some questions may always remain philosophical, outside the realm of definitive scientific conclusion.