There are numerous lists online of the basic assumptions of science--too many for me to feel comfortable that there is actually a standardized consensus on this. Here is my question. What are the most generally accepted 'a prioris' of science? And how well do they stand up under careful scrutiny? There is one particular list I found amenable to my to my own sense of the matter. And yet for each assumption I found myself wanting to add the qualification "to a degree". The universe is rational - can be determined by systems of logic. The universe is accessible - we have the means to interact with the universe. The universe is contingent - relationships of cause and effect operate within parameters. The universe is objective - exists independent and indifferent to sense perception. The universe is unified - nothing can be "separated" from the universe. From a methodological standpoint I think the above assumptions have been absolutely crucial to the great success and advancement of modern science, and yet I am not 100% convinced of their absoluteness. Recently it was keenly pointed out to me that the last 2 in the above 5 are contradictory. Can anyone tell me why?