> > Far too many people seem to believe that there *must*, at the end of the
> > game, remain *some* part of the Creation process that we will *never* be
> > able to explain. At its basis, this is "God of the gaps" thinking.
>
> Isn't it true that far too many people seem to believe that eventually
> *all* phenomena are suseptible to naturalistic explanation? At its basis,
> this is "Science of the gaps" thinking.
>
> David Gileff (gileff@sfu.ca)
> Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.
> Anything in Latin sounds profound.
>
I agree. Godel demonstrated that one cannot have a complete proof for every
proposition within a given system; there must be at least one axiom
unprovable within the given system. Thus, science cannot explain
everything, and thus scientism is untenable.
Jeff