Reply to comment

I think there is a lot of validity in Emily Dickenson's concept that all human experiences, and therefore science, are constructions of the mind. In studying natural processes through scientific methods (however cut-and-dry or loopy you choose to do it), and in considering the results meaningful as a step in the dierection of understanding our environment (whether or not they are "truths"), the scientist must have some belief in a rational, systematic, mathematically sound world. In this way, science is a construction of the mind. Without that construction, a belief in a systematic, scientific environment, results would have little meaning.

Once this construction of belief is established, though, and we have some unwavering faith that there is mathematical consistency and rational, systematic organization in the world/universe, we can follow that faith through discovering the body, world, science through Descartes'perspective. In scientific exploration, within a rational, scientific world, everything is made up of/happens because ofatoms , protein chains, neurotransmitters, the scientific method. Once we establish and believe in the construction of the mind that is science, there can be definitive truth.