Or as Brian Cox said, A law of physics is a statement about physics that hasn't been falsified yet. However, the procedures of science allow for progress, better and more useful understanding, while also searching for problems and rechecking old conclusions.
And the acid test of every proposed conclusion, the final arbiter in every argument, is reality, the world external to the self; while all the time, as I said, all the conclusions of science are tentative, unprotected from unknown unknowns.
But the central phenomena of religion are all personal, all existing as concepts (and, I'm told, experiences) in individual brains, without counterparts in objective reality.
The observation that all gods are purely conceptual / imaginary can be readily refuted by a satisfactory demonstration of a god in reality, one with objective existence; but there's none.
The ultimate justification for science is that it works, not that can draw absolute conclusions. Physics, medicine, chemistry, actually do things. The world couldn't support its present population without our science and technology, for example.
Since we find supernatural things and beings in all the cultures we know of, clearly they're something humans create, an artifact of our evolution. I suspect their chief function has been to answer unanswerable questions about luck, weather, fertility, death, and so on, and to be part of the tribe's social cohesion, along with language, customs, stories and heroes as parts of each person's identity, and thus reap the benefits of cooperation.
? You see, I’m trying to figure it out, but I’m just about burnt out investigating. thanks!
