Can we have genuine knowledge of a cause and reason about it’s nature without the use of science?
It seems to me that the resistance i see towards Theistic arguments (mainly from Aquinas) seems to be based on a perceived epistemological problem usually brought up by atheists. It is the idea that the only reliable knowledge is scientific knowledge, and causes cannot reliably be known outside of that method. It is often said that scientific knowledge is open to change and correction while reason by itself is not and remains open to error that cannot be resolved.
Obviously you will find that i disagree because i think those who make this argument are making a contextual error; this is to say they are conflating the objective of science with the objective of metaphysics or philosophy in general. But what do you think?