All science is based on the assumption that there *is* objective reality.
I also call it Absolute Truth.
>(I suspect there is another argument/philosophical movement that
>argues against the existance of objective reality that isn't
>being represented here. Is this true?)
The other argument/philosophical movement obviously comes up in these
discussions. It's worth defining it. Aside from religious beliefs, I can
see three different atheistic approaches based on beliefs and behaviour.
(1) Level-T atheists who believe and behave as they believe that there is
objective reality and that the world is rational, predictable, intelligible.
(2) Level-U atheists who believe and behave as they believe that there is no
objective reality and that the world is contradictory, bewildering,
unknowable.
(3) Level-H atheists who (deep-inside) believe as Level-T and behave as
Level-U. I call them Memetical Hypocrites. This kind of behaviour is very
USEFUL from "the number of toys gathered in life" point of view.
---------------------
Tad Niwinski from TeTa where people grow
3.141592653589793
There is no Absolute Truth, although we are getting closer and closer to IT.