Ok, let's start with a list of beliefs common to most scientists:

1. The patterns that we refer to as laws of nature simply arose. Any explanation involving ANYTHING but chance is wrong, absolutely wrong

2. Although, as Dr. Egnor correctly noted, you will not find ANY universal agreement on the definition of what "matter" is or what "physical" ultimately means, all atheists, physicalists, materialists share the following beliefs: "Although we can't agree on what "physical" IS, we all believe with absolute assurance that physical reality is NOT aware, conscious, alive, sentient or intelligent.

2a. All neuroscientists agree that the moon we experience is constructed by the brain. This does NOT mean there is not anything there when we are not looking, but it most certainly does mean the image of "moon" we experience is not there. So what is there? We only know of something that vibrates, some kind of quantum field (which itself is not a "thing" but a mathematical model based on the behavior of the instruments we use to make measurements) but we do know with absolute assurance that whatever is "there" (and we do know it is THERE in space-time) is NOT aware, conscious, alive, sentient or intelligent.

What all these beliefs have in common is there is not a scintilla of scientific evidence support them. None.

There is no philosophic reason to maintain these beliefs also, as patterns of nature and the nature of what underlies our experience is infinitely more intelligible if the substratum of the universe is aware, conscious, alive, sentient and intelligent.

Richard Lewontin, an evolutionary biologist, let the cat out of the bag when he said in fact, there IS no rational basis for the belief in materialism, but DESPITE this, we must cling to it because all alternatives are so terrible.