(April 29, 2014 at 3:28 pm)ns1452 Wrote: 1) Empirical studies fall short of being able to understand all of reality? How can you account for the existence of beauty and courage on only an empirical epistemology. It makes no sense why a fearful man will stand up in the field of battle and charge the enemy. This concept belongs to a realm beyond empirical science. Since some of you have doubted whether such a realm exists I would like to ask the following question.
Beauty and courage are the results of brain states. The examples you give are explainable in the field of neuroscience.
There is no need to appeal to the supernatural to explain them.
Quote:2) What makes empirical rationalism the sole and first criteria for understanding the world?
I'm not sure anyone has claimed that empiricism is the sole criteria for understanding the world. But it is by far the best method we've come up with so far.
And even if another method was found, how would one demonstrate that is more effective than empiricism?
You'd believe if you just opened your heart" is a terrible argument for religion. It's basically saying, "If you bias yourself enough, you can convince yourself that this is true." If religion were true, people wouldn't need faith to believe it -- it would be supported by good evidence.
