rationalskepticism.org

Hugin wrote:Here is a piece that basically argues the same as the OP. It makes sense to me.

You can treat science as a methodology that uses 'reason' without going down the rabbit hole of trying to establish the constituents of 'reason'. You can treat other approaches as 'discourses' (methodologically speaking). Discourse is like a 'talking cure'. Sometimes it works, but you don't really know how it works. I think it works by getting you to think about something other than what was bothering you.

I read Sweenith like a book, when he starts talking about 'innate knowledge'. He's after the sensus divinatus.