“On the face of it, both science and philosophy search for truth: scientists ask ‘big’ questions such as “Where did human beings ultimately come from?”, and philosophers similarly ask ‘big’ questions such as “What is the relationship between the mind and the brain?”. But whereas scientists sometimes actually reach truth (human beings evolved from more primitive mammals, which themselves evolved from amphibians, etc.), philosophers seemingly never do, and are doomed to forever go round in circles.”
Well, wait. Is it as simple as that? Can the human mind really be explained that way? Kastrup thinks the truth is more complex:News, “Must science be materialist?” at Mind Matters News
Kastrup isn’t having it.
Anyway, to claim that science must oppose non-materialist ideas is to make it into an ideology. We know little about some aspects of our universe.
You may also enjoy: Bernardo Kastrup argues for a universal mind as a reasonable idea.