Quote:
Originally Posted by Aaron W.
I have no idea what thread you're reading. If you can quote me where I've made that claim, then maybe we can have a continuing conversation.
Your statement ( which I quoted in my original question)
Quote:
I think there are two core assumptions of scientific materialism:
1) "Scientific" = The scientific method is the only source of reliable knowledge
I've been trying to find a way to get you to state what other sources ( if any) you think are more reliable or just as reliable as the scientific method. So far, you've only pointed to our everday experiences and conclusions, the flaws in those are what led to the use of the scientific method. It's meant to thwart our slip into logical fallacies and use a 'testing' approach to discovery and resolution.
If you didn't have another method in mind when you wrote the original quote and were just ranting, np. It's no use twisting this to be about my questions, I could be a sloppy questioner puzzled by your statement.
The scientific materialists are not wrong if all you point to are methods that are less reliable than the scientific method, that would make scientific method the most reliable source of knowledge which seems contrary to your position. It would seem a strange criticism to make of a position if you agree with it.
for the future, it would help if when you make that statement you add-
"The source(s) of knowledge as reliable or more reliable than the scientific method are (.... ... ... ) ." it saves a lot of time.
If you can't think of any, I understand.