All of science rests on assumptions, and I've noticed too that people require their opposing views to rest on less assumptions than their own views do, and that is simply not fair. For example, certain people require a greater degree of evidence for evolution than they do for miracles, or any other science. I'm aware of science having to rest on assumptions, yet we have nuclear power and computers. This is not the same as faith if there is a clear path from observation to technology as in science. Science is then validated by producing results. How is religion even comparable?
All of science rests on assumptions
Are you asserting that philosophy is useless and doesn't work whatsoever?
Sam Harris's faith is that we are biological robots, but we are responsible for our actions and an objective morality exists. Or do I kind of misrepresent his views?Lovely greetings from Germany.Liebe Grüsse aus Deutschland.Lothars Sohn - Lothar's sonhttp://lotharlorraine.wordpress.com