The voices of pop science — Daniel Dennett, Carl Sagan, Neil deGrasse Tyson, Bill Nye the Science Guy — teach us and our children that “everything, if Darwin is right, is mechanical and blind and purposeless at the bottom,” that “our planet is a lonely speck in the great enveloping cosmic dark,” that “the cosmos is all that is, or ever was, or ever will be,” and that, as specks upon specks upon specks, we “suck.” In short, we are completely insignificant; we are nothing but matter in a material universe. So our science must be restricted by materialist assumptions, and we must look for nothing more.
Is that what you want to believe? Or do you hope there is something more to life? Here, in a bonus interview from Science Uprising, philosopher Dr. Jay Richards gives us reason to believe that scientific materialism — the belief that there is nothing beyond matter — is inadequate to describe reality, and is therefore not a good starting point for, or definition of, science: