Natural Order and Science

[little_monkey]

Your post illustrates perfectly what I was implying: since you have no way to differentiate between what is true or false, then your proposal "our beings encompass a huge amount of data stored in our conscience, a gift of nature, blah,blah...' is just another statement that has no validity. The question you should be asking: how can one differentiate a crackpot theory from the real thing? If you have no test to differentiate these two, then your theory is no more and no less valid than any other crackpot theory. So you can advance the idea that "our beings encompass a huge amount of data stored in our conscience, a gift of nature, blah, blah..."but it is no different than any other crackpot theory.

Are you saying that you can differentiate all truths of nature because you have handful knowledge about the physical world?

Has your scientific knowledge brought you any jackpot theory about your own life?

Are you saying you have followed strictly laws of physics in making all your emotional decisions in your life?

If you are saying all that then I do not believe you.

No, I'm not saying that, but thanks for bringing it up. In areas where science has made great strides then I have something that is reliable. Science is not going to give all the answers, and those answers it provides are under temporary notice - should new evidence be discovered than those answers might be altered. It's a reality I must consider at all times. What may look as a weakness is really a strength as science has an inbuilt mechanism for self-correction. OTOH, if religion claims to have THE truth, then what if it's wrong, and possibly totally wrong, where does that leave those who have adhered to it all their lives? And then in areas where science is in its infancy or has nothing to say yet, I can still use rationality, logic and empirical method to seek out the best way to choose among the options that life offers me. It's much better than accepting any crackpot theory because there's a problem with that from the get-go - which crackpot theory do I choose since they're all equivalent?