The odd thing is that science always occur within a set of beliefs; but at least in principle they are beliefs subject to review and re-evaluation under the right conditions.

A simple example is the belief in the qualities of space. At one point it was a vapor from the gods; at another, an aether-rich box in which the Creator cast the universe; at another an elastic vacuum torqued by mass. There really is not yet in existence a bottom-line satisfactory characterization of it. Most of us are happy to work with the version we get from our habits of perception and our bodily filters, which makes it appear more or less boundless, contiguous, permeable and so on. A different approach might argue that (as some of the ancient Greeks speculated) it was a projection of viewpoints. You would think such a deep question would have been more directly contested over the centuries. I raise it just as an example of a sort of bounding belief within which all sorts of science can proceed without examining it.

A