Otherwise, you'll have to be more specific.
If we track the activity of the brain in some way, now or in the future we will find similarities in brain patterns between someone who "believes in science" and "believes in religion"
Even if you could calculate the entire universe according to the "laws of science," and "miracles" (i.e. exceptions) still occurred, then that wouldn't prove a God;
...Why wouldn't it prove a god, if it's a universe where god existed? Why couldn't there be a function or a space for a god? Note that I'm talking about a god.
And I see that Nietzsche made the map/territory distinction gj.
Hint: Nietzsche is one of the few philosophers who doesn't contradict himself here, because he recognizes the limits of the human mind at understanding reality. Something you fail to appreciate.
Nietzsche didn't know about Turing machines, tegmarkian universes and Godel's incompleteness theorem. So he already doesn't know what a human mind, a reality or logic is! I sincerely doubt he can teach me more about the limits of the human mind than hours of reading neurosci journals.
No system can be proven more or less "likely" to be true by the fruits it reaps, any more than you can say "Planting this tree here is the correct place to plant it, because it's grown apples for us to harvest." What if you didn't want apples? What would compel you to in the first place?
Fine then, we'll just ignore all this talk about "likely" and just look to the systems which reaps apples.
Or the systems which tell us how we want things.
Or the systems capable of telling us what our wanting things means.
Because that is how we act. Our brains may be very good at deceiving us into believing certain untrue things but it certainly won't let us act in a manner disadvantageous to its survival (usually) so it RATIONALIZES.
As Nietzsche correctly points out, "truth" (i.e. laughably limited human truth, a mix of induction and deduction) is actually making a comeback against the traditional truth-falsehood mix, as pursuers of truth have proven themselves not just capable of survival and reproduction, but of acquiring great power.
I cannot make heads or tails of this sentence.
Excuse me, I was unclear about what I meant about truth:
A map that corresponds well enough to the territory.
And that quote is an example of a map which doesn't correspond to the territory, and in fact was a very poor map.
--
Eh? You Serious? Easy Mode? How Disgusting!
Only Elementary School Kids should play on Easy Mode.