3 ms·
Where did I say that I, personally had to empirically experience something to accept it as fact? I edited my post in case it caused confusion. All I meant was
by kirse 17y ago
Where did I say that I, personally had to empirically experience something to accept it as fact? I edited my post in case it caused confusion.
All I meant was that I will only accept science that is grounded in empiricism, because that is the only basis for concrete, logical, conclusions from science.
Where science and religion differ (the unempirical), I'm going with my own intuition and convictions, because science is no more correct or certain than religion.
Just in case though, can you get on Skype so I can make sure I'm not arguing with an octopus? =P
- ThomPete 17y agoHuh? Science is the only thing that can be correct if we follow your own interpretation. To be correct about something it requires empirical evidence to measure up against lack of evidence. By definition religious claims can't be verified so they can never be true.