This discussing, particularly between Harlow and Max, raises an important philosophical point: can one simultaneously belief in two different epistemic methods? I would say 'no', for the reason that they may conflict. Harlow admits that in the case of science/empiricism conflicting with faith, then the former wins. If this is the case, however, how can any belief which is based solely on faith be rightfully considered 'knowledge'? We have no idea if this belief will be confirmed or denied by science, and since the possibility remains that it will be denied by science, we cannot be certain of any belief which we arrived at by faith. Such a belief would have the same epistemic status as any other evidence-less belief supported only by faith.