Thread: Tell Me What You Think About This Statement

The scientific process does utilize unproven postulates, making it a belief system.

For instance, promoters of the scientific method typically believe that the mind cannot affect the result, merely observe it. If it could affect the result, then observation itself would confound results. The scientific method posits that there is an objective reality outside the mind. This is an unsubstantiated belief about reality which cannot be proven using the scientific method since the method itself requires that posit to function.

Skepticism is not the same as cynicism regarding far-fetched possibilities. A true skeptic must attach the same caution to common sense they do to the most bizarre statements.

Science is belief in something because of evidence for it, religion is belief in something despite evidence against it.

With science anyone can postulate a new hypothesis, and if it fits better with reality or has predictions which prove true, it will (after some time) be accepted. With religion you must trust the word of "holy men". They are very different.

Originally Posted by Original Poster

For instance, promoters of the scientific method typically believe that the mind cannot affect the result, merely observe it. If it could affect the result, then observation itself would confound results. The scientific method posits that there is an objective reality outside the mind. This is an unsubstantiated belief about reality which cannot be proven using the scientific method since the method itself requires that posit to function.

Not a good example - there have been studies to test stuff like this.
Though science does postulate that any result should be repeatable. This is because without this clause, you can gain no knowledge.