[burzum]

The questions about the errors of scientism are no longer even a matter of debate. The ontological presuppositions of scientific materialism are seriously flawed and cannot be demonstrated by the claimed scientific method. There is no empirical event which makes them true. They are the fantasies of warped, frustrated, little Victorian men who wanted to skip out from Anglican and Puritan church services to frequent brothels.

You sound like David Hume. This whining about a posteriori methods is tiresome. If you honestly believe that there is no reason whatsoever to trust induction then you cannot trust science or anything else that uses induction. You will not even be able to say that the world exists, as Descartes pointed out. All you will be left with is your a priori methods that require axioms, which are by definition accepted without proof. Since you cannot justify any of these axioms, by definition, you will never know which ones are correct. That is unless you pull the 'Faith' card. Then you can justify all of your axioms by God and win every argument that you choose to participate just by being 'faithful.'

Great.

[HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity]

Oh, come on! It's a well-known joke!

The ectomorphic spinster who spends long hours drawing these graphs of monkey men...The nerd with the pocket protector crusading against the Dark Ages to prove these imaginary geneaologies of comicbook Apemen. Aren't the Johnny Weissmuller Tarzan movies enough for these guys?Lighten up.

People will still be arguing about this long after we're dead in Heaven.