My point is you're setting science on a pedestal by saying that science never leads us "wrong".
I agree with you when you say it has absolutely no moral implications, and since the notion of this entire thread was to demonstrate something about religion (or perhaps, as I'm trying to work with here, religious principles), why are we even talking about science again?
I agree (assuming I'm understanding you now, no promises) that science, the verifiable (and more importantly, falsifiable) source of empirical data can't tell us anything about how to live.
And yet, do you know how to live?

In a very real sense, I just want to know... how are you doing?


ps~ I'll agree, that last part is more rhetoric and jibing rather than logical valid, but no, it's still not a strawman argument.
A strawman argument is where I build a position similar to yours but with obvious deficienties and then tear it down. But in order to really get a strawman argument it would still require more of a build up, and probably a lot of "you say/said X". In short, misrepresentation. Have I supplied hard to think about analogies? Yes. Misrepresented your own position? I don't think so...

You should like, learn some philosophy and stuff man...:stoned:
Polymirize Reviewed by Polymirize on . a challenge to those who feel intelligent can you prove beyond a reasonable doubt that your religious beliefs are accurate? Rating: 5