sciences in general, what they are and their methods
I would define a first-order science as an ancient and limited form of each science that is valid within its limits and simplifications. Each first-order science is a limiting case of a higher-order science known today (the correspondence principles). These are sciences of unaided observation and common sense. In particular: First-order physics is the science of […]
The “new atheists” have caused a stir but have also shown their ignorance when they step outside their domain of scientific expertise and talk about metaphysics while denigrating philosophy. One result is that philosophers are now taking them on — and they have come out slugging. I’m seeing a new generation of philosophers, mostly Christians, who
At least from the time of Constantine to the Middle Ages, the Church was involved in the world – i.e., public affairs and endeavors such as philosophy. The Reformation was partly a reaction against this, refocusing the church on spiritual matters and leaving worldly matters to others, that is, to Christians outside the church’s official
Since the downfall of Ptolemaic astronomy, the Bible’s geocentric language has been an embarrassment to believers. Unbelievers spin the Galileo affair into a grand struggle between science and religion while believers hesitantly defend the Bible as speaking in prescientific terms. But when understood correctly, geocentrism is a valid position and one which we all use. The key is to
While it is generally thought that science is a form of cumulative knowledge, this has meant different things. Since Kuhn, new theories are often considered ‘incommensurable’ with old theories. Essentially, a ‘scientific revolution’ occurs in which the old theory is superseded by a new one rather than incorporated into it as a special case. But
I keep coming back to the difference between history and science. It seems to me that creationists treat origins primarily as an historical matter and secondarily as a scientific matter, which I think is correct. This is one reason why Bible history is very relevant to origins. But our opponents treat origins as primarily a
Before the 19th century it was commonly understood that only God (or perhaps the “gods”) were actually infinite. If one spoke about the actual infinite, one was doing theology. In mathematics infinity was considered a manner of speaking, which was clarified in the early 19th century with the careful definition of limits. In the late 19th century
Although intelligent design proponents avoid talking about the designer, the critics of intelligent design “know” that they are trying to sneak God into science. After all, who else could the designer be? The critics of creationism reject bringing God into science because God is a wild card that could make any hypothesis true. We seem
Louis Agassiz wrote: …if species do not exist at all, as the supporters of the transmutation theory maintain, how can they vary? And if individuals alone exist, how can differences which may be observed among them prove the variability of species? Darwin responded to Asa Gray: I am surprised that Agassiz did not succeed in
Science and history should be complementary disciplines. Science should not dominate history but they should work together. Science focuses on what does not change – what is conserved, what repeats, what is invariant. History focuses on what does change – the small details that turn out to make a big difference, the unique people and
