"To the contrary; it's grounded on the least assumptions. In fact it's grounded on only one assumption that could be said to be un-proven: that naturalistic methodology is the best way to find out about the universe we live in."
Kudos for this deduction, naturalism when applied to the real universe of you and I is mere assumption (AKA, junk science).
Now most of my universe I've observed to be metaphysical, i.e., 99% plus.
Our exchange of information here, for example, starts from a knower/known entity (myself) and transmits to a knower/known entity (you) in the William James or Augustinian sense. That is to say, you and I have what appears to me to be both huge and powerful cosmic-like psyches. These defy mere naturalistic explanation to a great extent (albeit psychologists everywhere attempt to oversimplify the psyche phenomenon and dehumanize what is really going on).
The same might be said for quantum theory with its oversimplified periodic table. Naturalistic chemistry only superficially deals with what is really going on inside matter. What do the 7 quantum levels in the periodic table really describe? Very little methinks, empirically.
Again, Light theory merely superficially describes and masters light phenomenon.
Etc., Etc.
In sum, 99%-plus of what I observe and master in my universe seems extremely metaphysical.
Now can I master the complex labyrinth of your will or my will and/or affections ?
See the problem ? It seems like its all metaphysical to me.
[This message has been edited by Philip, 11-12-2003]
™ Version 4.2