"Science may eventually explain the world of How. The ultimate world of Why may remain for contemplation, philosophy, religion"

Liberty Hyde Bailey's quote underscores a basic distinction in between different domains of human questions: science and philosophy/religion. He recommends that science is a tool for comprehending the systems and processes of the natural world-- essentially, the "How". Scientific questions dissects phenomena into observable, testable parts, therefore providing explanations for how things work. For example, science can explain how the worlds orbit the sun or how cells divide. This world pursues empirical evidence and uses the clinical technique to create understanding about deep space's detailed functions. The constant reproducibility of these findings allows for technological developments and a deeper grasp of our physical environment.

In contrast, the "Why" addresses questions of function, significance, and the ultimate reasons behind presence itself-- questions not easily quantified or observed. Bailey indicates that while science excels at revealing the mechanisms of deep space, it might never ever completely satisfy the human mission for significance and function. These existential questions often fall within the province of philosophy and religion, fields that ponder presence's ultimate reasons and review moral and ethical considerations. Philosophy encourages crucial thinking and thinking to check out fundamental truths about reality, existence, and human experience, while faith uses stories and belief systems that intend to offer supreme descriptions and function, often rooted in spiritual or magnificent realms.

Bailey's juxtaposition of "How" and "Why" also shows a recognition of the restrictions and borders intrinsic in each discipline. While they can complement each other in the pursuit of knowledge and understanding, they meet distinct functions. Contemplation of the "Why" welcomes reflection that might not provide scientifically testable outcomes but delivers profound personal and communal meaning. This dialogue in between science and the liberal arts improves the human experience, guaranteeing holistic understanding through both empirical rigor and philosophical self-questioning.