Atheism, Theism, Science & Philosophy

[The Grand Nudger]

I disagree and you have missed my point. The quantum mechanics interpretations to which I referred are not hypotheses, they're theoretical interpretations and mathematical models that have been devised in order to make sense of the available empirical evidence gathered from observations and experiments, such as the "double slit experiment", for example.

You're quite free to disagree, but you'll need more than feelings for that disagreement to have any teeth, won't you? Just how has "sense" been made? That's right, reason was applied.

I have presented examples (such as in post 130 on page 13), in which I have demonstrated that there are some areas where pure rationalism requires supplementation.

I saw no such examples. How would you have demonstrated them anyway? What if I just felt that you didn't - that would be the end of it, wouldn't it, because I feel so? No, no, by your choice of words and argument, and by your willingness to have a conversation about these things I think you also prefer reason. I'm just wondering where else "supplementation" may be required - as it hasn't been required in any of these places you mentioned - and at what point you'll get around to doing any supplementing (or making the case for it-or how you'll go about doing that, without staining the whole bit with reason)