That's an incorrect assertion based on cherry-picked evidence.
The Feynman video is a perfect example of this. He gives examples of cases where deep "why" answers aren't easily found. But those examples don't cover the entire field of science.
All you need to refute cherry-picked examples is a single counterexample. I've provided two counterexamples. I've also provided a derivation for one of them, here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27336901
The point is that science can and does answer "why" questions, and in many cases does so very definitively - so much so that we can predict behavior in other universes that we've never seen.
That's an incorrect assertion based on cherry-picked evidence.
The Feynman video is a perfect example of this. He gives examples of cases where deep "why" answers aren't easily found. But those examples don't cover the entire field of science.
All you need to refute cherry-picked examples is a single counterexample. I've provided two counterexamples. I've also provided a derivation for one of them, here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27336901
The point is that science can and does answer "why" questions, and in many cases does so very definitively - so much so that we can predict behavior in other universes that we've never seen.