Sure, we observe patterns and give them meaning, but some patterns are true and some aren't. For instance, for 200,000 years we observed the Sun moving across the sky, and the meaning we gave this observation was that the Sun goes round the Earth.
In the same way, for 200,000 years we observed patterns in nature and gave them meanings. The predominent meaning we gave the patterns of nature was Animism. We knew no better tnan to ascribe agency to inanimate matter.
And we personified the agency we thought we saw in nature. And so we explained nature in terms of the supernatural, and supernatural agents such as God.
However in the Enlightenment in the West in the 17th and 18th Centuries, we discovered the scientific method. And so we started to look for empirical evidence of the supernatural, but found none.
And so today in societies based on the Enlighenment, the only way we can believe in the supernatural is through blind faith.
And today, because the supernaturalists have no intellectual integrity, they became hysterical and elevate faith to a virtue in itself.
In fact the supernaturalists are in mourning for their God who died in the 17th, 18th and 19th Centuries.
All except the Islamists who have never experienced the Enlightenment and who naively believe Allah created the world and the species in it, including ourselves, homo sapiens.
I really think I get what you're saying. It's just that these scientific methods as you call them are still a layer of perception on reality.
For instance, if I hold an object and look at it, how am I understanding that object? I see it through the instrument of my eyes that interprets through what we understand as light. My brain also has to intercept that in some physical form and send me a greater message of relating what I'm seeing.
Basically, we are limited from understanding reality fully, because we are fully apart of it, because we perceive it. But without perceiving it, reality is also meaningless. It holds no form. We could look closely at an object and see that what we thought was a 3-dimensional cube turns out to have smaller parts that all have rotating/flowing parts with their own energies. If you think about what that implies, what is that object? From a smaller perspective, it is something else, and yet smaller something else. Then what is it really? To appreciate this is to understand it has no true objective form. Because even if a God created it, that God would also have to perceive to exist and it wouldn't be capable of fully comprehending what it is then (hence it logically has no objective form).
But yet we exist. God is an absurdity, but so is existence, and yet we exist - proof in itself. Everything we understand is an acceptance of faith, even if we don't quite fully understand that or care too. Engineering is about probability and maximizing that probability for accuracy of faith and mistakenly gives the illusion of inherent truth or fact. But it's okay if people don't realize this, since that's still the point. ;P
IMO, once someone understands that, the Jungian functions in their complete mathematical representation start making a lot of sense by conveying each of our own subjective experiences. And the ridiculous relationships people claim about the functions cloud this; the NTs that believe thinking is about being objective will never understand Jung. That's just not what it all is about.
Some people even have come up with the idea that light is part of the energy that all things give off during the flow of time, hence that time is directly related to light and why we may not be able to go faster than light. I doubt that will always be true, but it's interesting. Maybe one day we will even be able to find a complete connection between light and magnetism with great accuracy of perception.
There are so many interesting ideas in physics that are yet to be explored.
Anyway, I'm sure you get the point.
