>>2584259The good thing about materialism and science is that when we don't have enough data to reach a conclusion, we just admit "we don't know" and continue to investigate that matter further. No bullshittery about how it's a "mystery" or "God did it" or rules against blasphemy for asking questions.
Unless you think I'm painting idealists too harshly here, please remember the Catholic church burnt Copernicus at the stake for suggesting a Heliocentric solar system, and threatened Galileo with the same - only to subject him to a life in house arrest when he recanted. And even then, the church only accepted the Heliocentric model as late as in *1993*.
Besides, idealists themselves are fundamentally split between those who admit a physical reality exists and those who are affectively solipsistic.
If you as an idealist accept that a material reality exists, then you are still left with the same question as materialists on how the world physically operates, because if your God/s made material reality then your God/s must also create a model of physics by which it functions.
And if alternatively you are the type of idealist to deny there is any material reality whatsoever, then you are in a position where you are unable to prove anything at all is truly real beyond your own thoughts, so the question of physical laws is a nonsense and the nature of reality becomes a topic that is not possibly knowable.