I have the impression we're actually saying the same thing really. I agree that science might never be able to describe it accurately, but not out of the reason that it's inherently something outside of the purview of science, but simply because it's unfeasible to do so.
rumborak
The trouble I have with this statement is that postulating that it's infeasible is just as unscientific as postulating that the scientific method inherently can't answer this question. There are things we know which we do not know because of science - it takes knowledge to embrace the scientific method, even though the scientific method is skeptical.
Topic: "Thoughts" On Naturalism (Read 4974 times)
