>>>>If we all agree that absolute reality is a metaphysical necessity, then it should be easy for us to all acknowledge that God is the name for absolute reality in the history of our culture.
>>>
>>>Why can't it be science? Or more precisely, physics?
>>
>>
>>Because science and physics are something else.
>>
>>They are branches on the tree of knowledge.
>>
>>They are products of the mind.
>
>I think I have to question that. More precisely, Science and physics are not the products of our minds (unless you just mean the words 'science' and 'physics'). I'd suggest that what is the product of our minds is how we interpret and choose to understand the manifestations of the underlying laws of science and physics.


What's the difference between gravity and the law of gravity?



>>Minds are the result of absolute reality.
>
>Only if you believe that absolute reality is a magical God.

What's magical about it?


>>Science can't be the reality of minds, if science is a result of the mind existing.
>
>Are you absolutely sure that minds are not a result of the laws of science, physics, and chemistry?

Are you absolute sure that they are?

I'm fairly sure that your conscious experience is not a result of special relativity or quantum mechanics.

I'm fairly sure that special relativity and quantum mechanics are a result of your conscious experience.