yes, nothing can ever be proven completely true. depsite maybe the fact that you, as an individual, exist. "i think therefore i am" to what extent you exist is even up for debate. i assume you are refering to the fcat that neither induction nor deduction are valid ways of finding absolute truth. however, you are being very arrogant and unwise to assume that the statement will never be able to be founded in science. your just merely speculating.
I am referring to the fact that science cannot make the claim that the reduction it
must make of the world (by definition of science alone) in order to describe it, suddenly can be lifted.
A scientific positivist claims that all there is to the world is its scientific aspect as in "humans are 100% reducable to biology, and so is our mind reducable to the physiology of our brains". I am
not speculating that this statement can never be founded in science, it is a question of definition (of science itself) and logic.
i didnt contradict myself. i am merely highlighting an apparant contradiction in the reality of human experience. which is that we are completely reducable to material (the physiology of our brians), but we are not completely bound to act in ways that correspond with the physical.
If we are completely reducable to material, we are passively operating machines. We don't "act" at all if we are machines, the machine "acts" us. "We" do not even exist in such a case.