Northwest Slobovia wrote:Alyekra wrote:
I'm not saying that all scientists have to believe in God, but even atheistic scientists assume that certain things (The laws of logic, for instance) will be the same today as it was yesterday and will be tomorrow, and they can not account for that assumption without at least a god.
You might be surprised that scientists have been managing happily for decades, if not centuries, without any such need. Metaphysics has come a long way since Descartes. Logic, as we know it, descends from a bunch of principles that are either accepted as true (identity, A = A) or derived from such principles by reasoning. There's even a long proof that 1 + 1 = 2 by Gottlob Frege and Bertrand Russell, such is the state of our ability to reason without reference to the supernatural.
Everything else is -- at least in principle -- tentative. Today's rock-solid observation may be tomorrow's instrument error and misinterpretation. We know that some of our ideas are either wrong (General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics do not work and play well together) or incomplete (a lot of biology, especially at the molecular and ecological scales). We stumble forward regardless.
So how do you know your (or Gottlob Frege's and Bertrand Russell's) reasoning is valid?