One can derive morality usign the scientific method.I don't need to. Neither position, that there either is or isn't something beyond the space-time continuum, is scientifically valid. I don't need to prove one to disprove the other, as both conclusions fall outside the realm of science.
It is not valid to assume that science can describe all of reality, and that therefore reality beyond science does not exist. When you do, you've wandered off into tautology.
One can examine theology using the scientific method.Try it. You'll soon be making arbitrary and unscientific pronouncements.
Religion is an expression of the "divine," typically with big dollpos of worship/fear thrown in. Making use of the scientific method is no more religious than driving a car to work is making a religion out of driving. Science is simply a tool... a vastly useful tool, one that fits all circumstances, but nonetheless a tool.To what end?
Theology involves matters on which science is necessarily silent.
When one attempts to use that tool to indicate an absence of the Divine, typically with big dollops of pride, science becomes an idol, a theology of its own.
In other words, science needs to remain secular. Neither Theism nor Atheism qualifies, only agnosticism is secular.
