Hi

[Boreasos]

---

Any demonstrable scientific evidence.

Well you don't really believe that all truth claims can be validated by science right? You believe in the reality of things that science doesn't touch right?

I understand that there are some things that are arguably true or real, but have not yet been explained by science. I do however also believe that science will one day come to understand and explain even those things we see as out of the reach of science today. Science is after all simply the search for truth and understanding through the application of the scientific method.

---

However, in order to even conduct the scientific method there to be certain truths that are pre-supposed right? Some of which are...

There are laws of logic and they discern truth.
A person's senses are generally trustworthy.
The future will resemble the past.
There are laws of morality.
There is an underlying uniformity in nature, which allows predictions to be made.

I believe that a rational creator is another such truth that must be pre-supposed in order to obtain any knowledge through the scientific method. So I do not believe this is any less rational than believing in the reality of the laws of logic despite there being no scientific evidence to support their reality.

I disagree that laws of morality are a required presupposition for following the scientific method, but I agree that the other points are presupposed to one degree or another.

I also obviously disagree that you a creator of any description is a requisite presupposition for obtaining knowledge through the scientific method. There are rational reasons behind presuming the future will resemble the past, as the universe has an unbroken continuity and predictions can be made and demonstrated to be correct. In the same way there are rational reasons for using the construct of logic to form your conclusions. I cannot see any rational reason for the presupposition of a creator though, could you expand on your reasoning behind it?