The philosophy of science restricts itself to proof that comes into brain, from the outside, via the five senses. Science does not deal with things that can be sensed from within; internal information. This type of data does not come from outside through the senses, but originates inside the brain. In the SciFiction series Star Trek, Captain Kirk will play hunches. While to Mr Spock these choices seem illogical; line in the sand.
As an example of both at the same time; say you are in a group and there is a strange noise. Everyone heard something, but they cannot agree what made the sound. Science limits itself to a generic sound that everyone heard, but it draws the line in terms of all the internal processing leading to the various specific opinions of what the sound was. The latter would need to be investigated, separately, until there is proof that can be subject to sensory verification by the group.
Say, right after the everyone heard the sound, one person immediately inferred the correct source of the sound. However, that person has no tangible proof for the group to verify this with their senses. Science will need to deny the reality of this truthfully claim, until the group can verify the truth of the claim with their senses. Just because the group cannot sense it, does not mean it does not exist or is not true. All it means is, the claim violates the philosophy of science; arbitrary subjective truth line in the sand, until the proof for the senses is offered.
Science is full of examples, where people get Nobel Prizes decades after they make their claims. The Philosophy is not perfect and appears to have been designed to factor out the inner world, since internal data processing cannot be verified with the senses, even if it is correct. The internal processing conclusions will need to be dumbed down, so there is a philosophical way to relate. If you told someone you have a tiny device that can make music, it may seem far fetched. If you show them, they may still be stumped, but seeing is believing.
The is an entire world on the other side of the line. Dreams are a good example of internal data that is real, since we have all had dreams. However, specific dreams are not reproducible by will, nor can the group, climb i to your skin, to witness your dream, so they can verify the details. This type of data does not use the five senses, coming from the outside. Dreams uses the same pathways but from within. Based on the line in the sand, dreams will be denied by the philosophy of science, or called soft science at the best. The class of phenomena called dreams, is real and can be verified by others, but the specific data of any given dream, by remaining unique, is on the other side of the line. The side of science line is not perfect, but a philosophical approach; differential or specialty approach.
God and religious experience appear to be more in the gray area of unique data. that can only be experienced and verified from within. However, this type of experience is not unique, but is fairly common, like dreams. Each person who makes the claim, can be quite objective to their unique data, but it will be called subjective, based on the group philosophy of science; on the other side of the line. Proof or lack of proof of God is about data that appears on the opposites side of the line created by the Philosophy of Science.
Ancient people did not have this line in the sand. Their internal world and their external worlds were more merged. The gods within dreams and visions could also appear to come to one through their senses; projection. Like a parent boosting the ego of their child to be more than they can be, a collective social projection, onto a person, could cause the inner world of the group to appear in their outer world; Pharaoh became a god. In modern times this is done with celebrities, where they get to personify our dreams and fears.
