The history and philosophy of naturalism
This is the latest post in a series on science and metaphysics; the previous post is here. The one and only metaphysical postulate of natural science is this: Everything has a fixed nature. This postulate allows the study of classes or kinds or types of things with a common fixed nature. For example, it allows […]
The previous post in this series is here. The key to this middle way, if it is truly a middle way between extremes, is divine self-limitation—the idea that the God of the Bible is vulnerable because he makes himself so out of love. p.139 … the personal God of the Bible is revealed there as
Controversies are more difficult than they need be. I have written about this before here and here. One challenge for dealing with controversies is that terminology is misleading, inaccurate, or loaded. Here are some examples from the creation-evolution controversy. The term ‘evolution’ originally meant an unrolling, and was applied by Charles Lyell and Herbert Spencer
There’s a common understanding that most writings need to be interpreted — especially those of a religious or philosophical nature. But mathematical and scientific writings are similar and need to be interpreted, too. Consider that mathematicians and scientists write as if they were creating a world. Mathematicians say things like, “Let there be a line
An inference of intelligent design (ID), or any version of creationism, or whatever might hint at the supernatural is often considered a science stopper. See, for example, this and the final chapter of Stanley’s book reviewed earlier. Look at two key examples from the ID literature: Dembski’s design inference and Behe’s irreducible complexity inference. Do
Previous posts review Matthew Stanley’s book, which describes how theistic science was displaced by naturalistic science in 19th century Britain. He calls the latter “scientific naturalism,” which is accurate since it is a version of the philosophy, naturalism. It would be opposed by “scientific theism,” though I don’t think he uses that term, perhaps because
Part 7 is here. Chapter 7 is on how the naturalists “won.” In short, they pushed their agenda with their opponents hardly noticing. p. 242 – Huxley won. Modern science is practiced naturalistically, and most scientists would be baffled to think that there was any other way — precisely what the scientific naturalists were trying
From theistic science to naturalistic science, part 8 Read More »
Part 6 is here. Chapter Six is on free will and natural laws. A philosophical dispute took center stage, with the future of science and society at stake. p. 194 – Victorian society’s base assumption was that the soul and will could act freely, whether to select a meal or to accept divine grace. Being
From theistic science to naturalistic science, part 7 Read More »
Part 5 is here. Chapter Five is on Intellectual Freedom. p. 153 – The narrative presented by the scientific naturalists was one of liberation. Only with the escape from dogmatic theology was science able to pursue truth and accuracy. But this value was also widely held by religious figures, including Maxwell and his fellow theistic
From theistic science to naturalistic science, part 6 Read More »
Part 4 is here. Chapter Four on the Goals of Science Education describes how Maxwell and Huxley each volunteered to teach at the Working Men’s College but for very different reasons. p. 119 – This idea that a religious intent is incompatible with science education is a major part of the educational side of modern
From theistic science to naturalistic science, part 5 Read More »
