RE: Science presuppositions as being grounded on faith
October 13, 2014 at 9:12 am
(This post was last modified: October 13, 2014 at 9:14 am by bennyboy.)
Science doesn't necessarily require faith. It requires only observable patterns, a willigness to observe them, and a desire to make useful inferences about them. Technically, it doesn't even really matter if the things you study "really" exist, or if they are illusions of a single solipsistic mind. So long as that solipsistic mind can draw inferences and benefit from them, science is STILL more useful than superstition.
You could say that believing in a physical monism is an act of faith. But you could equally see it as establish a sensible context: "For everything we can experience and know about as human beings, THESE ideas prove useful, and those others (i.e. religious ones) don't."
Let's say that any belief system requires a kind of faith. That doesn't mean that faith in bullshit is better than faith in the truth insofar as we are capable of observing it.
You could say that believing in a physical monism is an act of faith. But you could equally see it as establish a sensible context: "For everything we can experience and know about as human beings, THESE ideas prove useful, and those others (i.e. religious ones) don't."
Let's say that any belief system requires a kind of faith. That doesn't mean that faith in bullshit is better than faith in the truth insofar as we are capable of observing it.
