Positivism

Heisenberg, the 20th century physicist, once said if we listened to positivists, all we could talk about would be tautologies. Positivists' dogma is indeed such that it stifles the human thought severely and tries to make people who pander important questions like the meaning of life ashamed of themselves. On the contrary, I think that it is they who should be ashamed of themselves for bringing forth this insane and pointless effort.

What science discovers, science discovers. But it cannot suggest us how to live, what to do, when to do something, and so forth. What science cannot touch, philosophy does, and should. Is this effort non-sensical or meta-physical? Positivists, when offered a question whose answer is not apparent, choose to ignore it or label it non-sensical, as if labeling it will make the question go away and make us feel better (it doesn't).

Thus I say that whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must start questioning, and I do not feel the need to number this statement to make it look important, either.