SSM Plebiscite

[LP]

I don't know the proper labels. Whatever Sheldrake calls himself, or whatever David Bohm calls himself. The labels are inconsequential. I'm not arguing labels, I'm arguing belief.

There is no science that includes a belief, scientists following the scientific method never talk in absolutes, they only talk in probabilities. There may be references to probability which come across as an idea and a belief but they are foibles of language, they are not "beliefs" like religious faith!

It's the critics of science that make, imply or infer commentary about absolutes, beliefs and blind faith. Religion cannot have anything else but blind faith, it's the foundation of religion. That doesn't mean scientists cannot be religious, they can have a faith, but having faith doesn't mean they accept the world without question or resort to mysticalities to explain it or that faith becomes part of their work! If it does cross over to their work, they are no longer using the scientific method, and that is a foible of their humanity not a foible of science.