RE: Atheist VS Naturalist - the latter sounds more appealing to me...
May 26, 2020 at 8:16 pm
(This post was last modified: May 26, 2020 at 8:18 pm by Belacqua.)
(May 26, 2020 at 8:01 pm)possibletarian Wrote: Why would you jump to considering a non~natural explanation for an experience, what reasoning did you use to make that jump ?
If there were a case in which no scientific explanation were possible then ruling out a supernatural explanation a priori would be begging the question.
People's insistence that if the frog sang an Italian duet it would absolutely have to have a natural explanation is begging the question. Promissory naturalism.
A more skeptical person, when seeing something that science has shown to be impossible, might consider a supernatural explanation. Someone committed to a scientific metaphysics would rule out a supernatural explanation.
People whose way of interpreting the world includes factors that science can't study would understandably see events inexplicable by science as evidence that there are things science can't explain. People whose way of interpreting the world is that it's all natural would say that events inexplicable by science will be explicable someday.
That's all for today. I'm just repeating myself.
