Browsed by
Tag: Methodological Naturalism

Time to Take the Non-Science Out of Science

Time to Take the Non-Science Out of Science

Scientists typically claim they must rely on methodological naturalism to do their science. It’s the principle that treats everything as if it were strictly natural, as if there is no supernatural reality. Several years ago I wrote on this blog about how that was no need at all, and in fact it brings a host of non-scientific assumptions into science with it. Two years ago my theory was formally published in this volume of conference proceedings. Today the Discovery Institute published…

Read More Read More

Regularism: A Better Alternative to Methodological Naturalism

Regularism: A Better Alternative to Methodological Naturalism

(Update 3/29: Please regard this series as a first draft with important revisions yet to come.) I have just completed an argument to the effect that “Methodological Naturalism” (MN) is a false and flawed requirement for the practice of natural science. MN’s assumptions are theological rather than scientific, as witnessed by the fact that there is at least one form of “Methodological Theism” with equivalent implications for the practice of science. MN’s theological assumptions are disputable, and they are not resolvable…

Read More Read More

Why Scientists Should Reject Methodological Naturalism

Why Scientists Should Reject Methodological Naturalism

(Update 3/29: Please regard this series as a first draft with important revisions yet to come.) Review In three prior posts in this series I shown that Methodological Naturalism (MN) relies on assumptions that are: Theological rather than scientific Disputable rather than firmly established Unnecessary rather than required for science In particular I have shown that an attitude of methodological theism could be defended as appropriate to the practice of science. If that is so, then the choice of methodological naturalism…

Read More Read More

Why Science Doesn’t Need Methodological Naturalism (2)

Why Science Doesn’t Need Methodological Naturalism (2)

(Update 3/29: Please regard this series as a first draft with important revisions yet to come.) Two days ago I wrote about the theology implicit in one justification of Methodological Naturalism’s (MN’s) being a requirement for science. I was responding then to the second of the three Justifications for MN I had listed in the first post in this series: The supernatural is not testable. Admitting the supernatural into science would undermine scientific rationality. MN works. (I am still open to…

Read More Read More

Science Doesn’t Need Methodological Naturalism

Science Doesn’t Need Methodological Naturalism

(Update 3/29: Please regard this series as a first draft with important revisions yet to come.) It’s virtually a given that science cannot operate apart from methodological naturalism. Eugenie Scott of the National Center for Science Education provides a definition for the term as she expresses some of the devotion that is felt for it: Science neither denies nor opposes the supernatural, but ignores the supernatural for methodological reasons. The history of science has shown that progress comes from logical…

Read More Read More

%d bloggers like this: