Good show, man. We seem to have argued this till the end. It was fun playing devil's advocate though while it lasted. Its not often I get to argue with someone who's worth arguing with.
Yes, well, I still have to get it through to you that science is more reliable than religion.

Quote Originally Posted by C0FFINCASE
However the way the system of thought is constructed demands that kind of conclusion you get when you follow it to the letter. Science likes to interpret the world in terms of that system when it works and then when it doesn't explain it differently but still pretend its realism. That's my problem. You can't use the system to explain the world and say that's how it is and then go do something different when it doesn't work. That reduces credibility, which is my only real problem with science itself.
I think it's all a misunderstanding of how science works on your half. Science does not claim to be absolutely true with no alternatives (e.g. if it says the earth is flat, it doesn't say that there is no way the earth is round). What science decides to be true is whatever theory so happens to have the most supporting evidence at the time. That doesn't mean there are no alternatives and that it's the absolute truth, and if tomorrow something else is found to be true, than it must have changed overnight. It means science is open to being wrong. When something else is found to have more evidence, or the current theory is found to be disproven, then it is scrapped and concluded as being wrong and having always been wrong. It doesn't work on a "whatever we say now is the absolute truth" basis, but a "whatever we say now happens to have the most evidence to support it but may be proven wrong in the future."
And the point being, when science, wrong or not, has more objective evidence than any religious ideal, then science is the better of the two to base one's decisions on.

To assume the world is real is no different than to assume there is a god. I mean there's no reason to believe there is a world for science to explain. Even if you make the assumption there is a world. What is reality? What is true? We're far from even having a working concept and definition of either. It would seem to to me that for science to come forth and say this or that is true and real. They ought to define it better than "cause it works and can be repeated." What if tomorrow it doesn't work?
If tomorrow it doesn't work, then they scrap the theory and come up with something that does work in both tomorrow's rules of the universe and today's.
There's quite a large difference between assuming the world exists and assuming god exists. One of them affects your day to day life, your decisions, and your mind. Jump off a bridge. It's not going to hurt you. Physics will stop working, and you'll land safely in another dimensions full of candy and naked women. Or, since we know what will happen when you do dangerous things, don't do dangerous things.
I assume you've been burnt before, via one method or another. It really doesn't matter whether or not you, your body, or the heat actually exists. What does matter is that what you felt as a result was real. The only provable thing in the universe, ŕ la Descartes, is yourself. You exist. You and your thoughts change as a result of interactions with this world, whether or not it exists. So, you and your thoughts need to determine how to interact with this world, real or not, in such a way that is beneficial to you and your thoughts. It's a pretty egocentric view, but it's the one you seem to want to focus on, not willing to take a step without absolute certainty. Regardless, science offers the best view as to what will happen as a result of two interactions in this world. Maybe tomorrow, heat will stop existing, or make you orgasm when you touch it. But something tells me you aren't going to want to get burnt again to find out. Because you and your mind learn through patterns. If it happened once, it will happen again. And even if it doesn't, there's no need to take the risk, and no reason to assume that it won't have the same affect on you and your mind as it did last time.
That's the pattern of science and human nature. If it keeps happening, it will likely keep happening, real or not. Science merely tells us what is happening and why, based on other things that have kept happening. Denying them is as silly as touching fire in hopes of achieving orgasm, and I'm certain you aren't that silly in real life.