RE: rational naturalism is impossible!
October 4, 2013 at 10:28 am
(This post was last modified: October 4, 2013 at 10:29 am by Faith No More.)
As others have said, P2 is incorrect, which negates C2. There is no teleology to evolution. Mutations happen and they are either weeded out or ignored by natural selection. If they are detrimental to survival, they are more likely to be weeded out, and if they are more likely to be passed on if they are beneficial to survival.
Also, C3 doesn't take into account probability theory and our ability to determine what knowledge is more likely to be truthful than others. Rather than simply render all knowledge useless, naturalism requires us to determine the probabilities of certain knowledge. Just because we can't be certain about something doesn't mean we can't understand that that something is very likely to be true or untrue.
Also, C3 doesn't take into account probability theory and our ability to determine what knowledge is more likely to be truthful than others. Rather than simply render all knowledge useless, naturalism requires us to determine the probabilities of certain knowledge. Just because we can't be certain about something doesn't mean we can't understand that that something is very likely to be true or untrue.
Even if the open windows of science at first make us shiver after the cozy indoor warmth of traditional humanizing myths, in the end the fresh air brings vigor, and the great spaces have a splendor of their own - Bertrand Russell
