ok, i like what you've said
but would you acknowledge that in the past Science, Logic and Reason have all made massive errors as well?
I would put it that where on past history science has been demonstrated to be less than 100% truth, hailing it as a replacement for God is a little premature.
(, Wed 4 Mar 2009, 11:49, Reply)
Of course there've been mistakes.
However, that's part and parcel of science. What survives, though, is the intellectual parsimony, and that's worth keeping.
There is no evidence at all that points to the existence of a deity. There is no evidence at all for some non-religious beliefs. However, that doesn't mean that science and religion are on a par.
(
Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Wed 4 Mar 2009, 11:59,
Reply)
There's certainly no empirical evidence, I'll grant you
but plenty of people, myself included, claim experiential evidence. And that I'd say is the nub of the whole issue. And if you can resolve that conflict then I'd pin the medal on you myself.
(, Wed 4 Mar 2009, 12:16, Reply)