Quote Originally Posted by Askthepizzaguy View Post
The existence of knowledge is as much an assumption as your existence, and the existence of the universe.

Yes, we must assume they exist, but they are self-evident. They require no further evidence than their existence. That is why when people question objective truth, knowledge, reason, logic, evidence, sense, and understanding, I question why they bother questioning.

Without knowledge there is no reason. Without reason there is no logic. Without logic, we are precisely as well-off dead as we are alive, so we should not lock anyone up for murders, nor bother to procreate.

One questions at that point why we bother breathing, if nothing matters and nothing is true or provable or knowable. I say, be bold. Question whether you can know. But you will never know that you can never know, because THAT IS IMPOSSIBLE.
Ah, but this is where it gets slippery. You mentioned logic, but logic is based on the assumption that the measurable is repeatable, and that 1 + 1 will always = 2. This is actually a pretty big assumption, and it's what all modern science is based on.

1,000 years ago the existence of God would have been considered even more obvious. "Man is the measure of all things".

Ultimately the stance of the religious fundamentalist is as logical as your own, it simply has a different start point. You assume that your careful measurement of the natural world is accurate, they assume their holy text is accurate. You demand that the Holy text eqate to the natural world, or be proved false, and they demand that your conclusions from measurement equate with their holy text, or be proved false.

They have the advantage because they can refute any measurement you produce by declaring that it has been altered by God.