Reply #118: Let's see.You have been here since October 31st and yet you claim

[humblebum]

that I have never given examples. And you are telling me about being laughable. LOLOLOLOL! Just in this thread I have not only mentioned other methods, but specifically mentioned historians. How does a chef determine what constitutes a great recipe, or how does a playwrite determine whether or not a script is good or not. What determines a good business model? How does a jury arrive at a guilty verdict, when there are no witnesses and only vague circumstantial evidence? These are all examples using methods that rely on varying degrees of objectivity and subjectivity. Logical empiricism is not always applicable to all situations.

And yes Dawkins is either ignorant of philosophy, or he ignores those methods that would definitely put a crack in his reasoning.