I’m not assuming anything , I’m trying to figure what you are trying to say.
That seems off to me. Logic is a tool of science, but science itself is about gathering and processing evidence/data - it’s the facts that drive scientific thinking. Logic simply being one of tools in their arsenal, not the glue that holds science together, that’s what evidence is all about.
Doesn’t the Big Bang theory in science do that?
Those two paragraphs lost me.
Here’s another place you lost me.
First off, I’m too confused by what you are trying to say to be presuming anything.
Secondly, don’t fall into the same trap of presuming to understand where I’m coming from. Though if you’re curious about that you might visit the introduction thread I started yesterday.
Then the relevance of “honesty” - doesn’t a sane society require trust between people. Doesn’t trust require people to be honest about their own motives and then honest in dealing with others, and honesty in representing what the other says. To me it seems that respecting honesty is the foundation of civility and healthy community. Of course, no one is perfect, and of course, I’ve let lies slip through my lips, but then there’s that nagging conscience that lets me know I’m in the wrong when I do so.
and so on and so forth . . .
I’ve no idea what that says, even though I’ve going over that sentence over and over.
Nature = everything?
Why would discussing “Nature” force the dialogue to religion.