Before one more tree falls on one more power line or internet services 
vacate again, let me say thanks for this thoughtful and provocative 
response, and I stand corrected about the distinction between scientific 
materialism and scientific reductionism (which seems a contradiction in 
terms, but otherwise is what I'm taking to be "scientism"). I've got a 
couple questions about "design" and what "fundamental" means, I think, 
but need to rake my unscientific mind over the coals of your better 
informed post once or twice more...

Ken A

On 7/2/2012 11:13 AM, Tom Gray wrote:

> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> I don't see the failure of physics as a specific refutation of 
> scientific materialism but as a refutation of scientific reductionism. 
>  However I think that you are quite correct in stating that modern 
> science is undercutting "scientism". Many important concepts are 
> outside of the scope of science.