“Science is the only reliable means of discovering truth.”
I gathered that it was a teenager saying this so perhaps we should cut her some slack but still, it’s a comment that is certainly not rare on atheist blogs. What this young atheist is talking about is positivism. Those who have devolved into scientism actually believe this.
PROBLEM: Why would we believe that science or the scientific method of inquiry is the only reliable means of discovering truth when that idea itself can’t be proven scientifically?
Some atheists will tell you that logic is just a higher form of thinking. Yet logic must already be in place before any “logical” thinking is even possible. In fact, it is because of the laws of logic that we can know that relativism cannot be true, that it is in fact self-contradictory. For example, relativism tells us that there is no truth, yet the relativist expects us to believe that that statement IS true.
An atheist sceptic will tell you that, “There are only two kinds of truths - those that are true by definition and those that are true by empirical confirmation.”
However, this statement is neither true by definition NOR is it provable by empirical confirmation. The sceptic’s statement is not merely false, it is also incoherent.
An atheist sceptic will tell you that,
1) Natural law is by definition a description of a regular occurrence
2) A miracle is by definition a rare occurrence
3) The evidence for the regular is ALWAYS greater than that for the rare
4) A wise man always bases his belief on the greater evidence
5) Therefore a wise man should never believe in miracles
With about ten seconds of thought you will see that obviously the evidence for the regular is NOT always greater than for the rare. For example, how about the origin of the universe? That’s just about as rare as an event gets. How about another rare event - life arising from non life. It happened only once but again, I think most would agree that we have a fair bit of evidence running around that it did take place. In fact, virtually every event in history has taken place only once (the first time) and yet we know that it did in fact happen.
The sceptic’s third point must be considered false. In fact the atheist sceptic’s entire argument is false. Any arguments against miracles must fail because they are based on false philosophical assumptions rather than observational evidence.
Science is most definitely NOT the only reliable means of discovering truth.