I would respond by saying that the very science he
seeks to utilize so zealously is hanging in mid-air apart from philosophical
presuppositions about the reality of the external world, the uniformity of
nature, the capacity of the mind to understand the world—these most basic
commitments undergirding his entire enterprise are all known apart from merely
empirical and/or logical considerations.
Indeed, it was unflinching empiricism of David Hume that showed such
presuppositions to be entirely unfounded if we restrict ourselves to “the most
reliable tools we have to determine truths about the world.” But more to the point: given evolution, our
cognitive faculties were selected for in terms of their conductivity to
survival. Why think, therefore, that the
particular cognitive faculties behind our theoretical beliefs (which help us
little to survive, and are therefore irrelevant to natural selection) have any
correlation at all with truth?