it is only through consistently challenging all viewpoints that we achieve anything in regards to human understanding

socrates was one of the first to have started it with the old school scientists (yes i will argue till i am blue in the face that allmost all the old philosophers were scientists)

even in the filed of theology revision and peer review happens even if its not er aparrent, otherwise new religions would never form, desintion in the ranks in both science and religion has often resulted in "new" ways of looking at the world

by definition science is a "belief" system, i can choose to believe the results of any given experiments validity or not, sometimes wieghted with the review of many others and somtimes not, (look at current beliefs of different scientists about mars and water there etc) a given scientists view on somethings like say "what killed the dinosaurs" can be just as controvesial and filled with preconsieved ideas as a religious belief

each religion is in a way, an on-going "experiement" the hypothesis is the stated dogma for each belief system, the experment itself is the way the paticular religions followers laymen leaders etc conduct thier lives, and the results of the experiment are found out upon ones death,

ocums razor or not, is the prossess of the universe just some random reactions in time? or is it by design? both religion and science attempt to answer the question

for it is the question that drives us