RE: Atheist VS Naturalist - the latter sounds more appealing to me...
June 1, 2020 at 9:30 pm
(This post was last modified: June 1, 2020 at 9:33 pm by Succubus#2.)
(May 31, 2020 at 10:13 pm)Belacqua Wrote: This is from Tufts University:
Quote:Methodological naturalism is not a "doctrine" but an essential aspect of the methodology of science, the study of the natural universe. If one believes that natural laws and theories based on them will not suffice to solve the problems attacked by scientists - that supernatural and thus nonscientific principles must be invoked from time to time - then one cannot have the confidence in scientific methodology that is prerequisite to doing science. The spectacular successes over four centuries of science based on methodological naturalism cannot be gainsaid. On the other hand, a scientist who, when stumped, invokes a supernatural cause for a phenomenon he or she is investigating is guaranteed that no scientific understanding of the problem will ensue.
Yes it's a good read but I fail to see how it supports your position, If you had a position that is.
Bel, what's the difference between an apologist for god and an apologist for the supernatural?
How could an outsider looking in decide?
Miserable Bastard.
