(June 1, 2020 at 5:05 pm)Belacqua Wrote:(June 1, 2020 at 8:10 am)polymath257 Wrote: The scientific method goes far beyond what the Tufts University description says. ALL that needs to happens is that there are observable patterns in what happens. And if there are such patterns, science can be done.
The passage I quoted isn't a comprehensive description of the scientific method. It's about methodological naturalism. I thought it was strange that you repeatedly advocate methodological naturalism while denying that such a thing is necessary.
Quote:If we observed ghosts and those ghosts had detectable patterns of behavior, then science can study ghosts.
I'm glad you've come around to my position on this.
I've said repeatedly that things have natures, and that if they do only what is in accord with their natures then the thing is natural. I've pointed out that many Christians say that God is natural because he only is and does in accord with his nature.
You resisted this at first but it seems we agree on this part now.
I'd change that slightly and say that *if* God exists, he/she/it is natural.
