RE: Science is inherently atheistic
November 26, 2018 at 7:53 am
(This post was last modified: November 26, 2018 at 8:05 am by polymath257.)
(November 26, 2018 at 12:29 am)tackattack Wrote: polymath,
natural to me is the perception of or description of characteristics of natural phenomena, based on empirical evidence from observation, logic and experimentation. They don't necessarily have to be tangible, they can be forces or universal laws or logically sound constructs like gravity, entropy and math.
What identifies something as a 'natural phenomenon'?
Quote:(November 25, 2018 at 9:56 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote:
Yes by your definition my beliefs are irrational because they are objectively unjustifiable and based on a belief in supernatural causes. It isn't an argument from ignorance if I'm not presenting it as a false dichotomy. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, without the tools and perspective to qualitatively evaluate. There have been things that were supernatural that aren't now. Does that mean that supernatural things don't exist? No. I believe the scientific method is great for testing the known natural physical world. It's great at falsifying superstition and bringing more understanding into our world.
Let me try and explain my perspective, At one point sickness was supernatural. It was demons and angels. Then science corrected that to be smelly things caused disease, thus making it a natural explanations for the supernatural. Then science corrected itself again to say it was bacteria and it was a different natural explanation. Supernatural can be a catch all for things we don't understand at the time, but that doesn't mean they can't be known. If everything in the universe can at one point be known, then everything in the universe would be natural. That would still leave things outside of the universal constraints and rules or eternal things as supernatural. Until we have a perspective or tool that could measure the eternal, or outside our universe there will still be supernatural. I think we are digressing tough and I'm sleepy. I'll pick this up later.
So things changed from being supernatural to being natural when we got explanations for them?
Doesn't that make labeling something as supernatural is the same as declaring ignorance about it?
Are quantum events 'supernatural' because they are not deterministic? Why do you think there are things 'outside of the universal constraints and rules'?