Naturalism

[DarkProphet]

One thing that has been bothering me when looking over Evolution vs Intelligent Design arguments is the term Naturalism. What is naturalism and why do Christians seem to look down on it so much?

 

[ManOfTheAmish]

One thing that has been bothering me when looking over Evolution vs Intelligent Design arguments is the term Naturalism. What is naturalism and why do Christians seem to look down on it so much?

I like to see myself as a Christian naturalist philosopher although I am wondering if you mean it the same way I apply it for myself or not.

 

[ebia]

One thing that has been bothering me when looking over Evolution vs Intelligent Design arguments is the term Naturalism. What is naturalism and why do Christians seem to look down on it so much?

I can't say I've read a lot of ID literature lately, so I'm not sure how they use the term. Are we talking about

Naturalism (philosophy), any of several philosophical stances wherein all phenomena or hypotheses commonly labeled as supernatural, are either false, unknowable, or not inherently different from natural phenomena or hypotheses

or

Methodological naturalism is the methodological assumption that observable events in nature are explained only by natural causes without assuming the existence or non-existence of the supernatural,

?

 

[Markus6]

There are two types of naturalism that we must differentiate between:

Metaphysical naturalism that says that supernatural things do not exist. Christians are obviously not going to accept this as we believe in a supernatural God.

and

Methodological naturalism, which is a tool used by science i.e. assuming that all observable phenomena have natural causes.

ID is basically the position that methodological naturalism doesn't work and can be scientifically disproved. The problem is that all of science relies on methodological naturalism (e.g. we assume that accelerations are due to natural forces, not God pushing things along).

 

[ReformedChapin]

There are two types of naturalism that we must differentiate between:

Metaphysical naturalism that says that supernatural things do not exist. Christians are obviously not going to accept this as we believe in a supernatural God.

and

Methodological naturalism, which is a tool used by science i.e. assuming that all observable phenomena have natural causes.

ID is basically the position that methodological naturalism doesn't work and can be scientifically disproved. The problem is that all of science relies on methodological naturalism (e.g. we assume that accelerations are due to natural forces, not God pushing things along).

Which invalidates any possibility of identifying the designer if he is supernatural.

 

[Markus6]

Which invalidates any possibility of identifying the designer if he is supernatural.

ID isn't about identifying the designer, it's about proving a the need of designer scientifically. The identity isn't part of ID, it could be any God or aliens.

I would agree that methodological naturalism means we can't gather any information on God through science. That is why we need Jesus and the bible. Science is, however, gathering information about God's creation, through which we can learn something of him, in the same way studying a work of art tells you about the artist.

 

[Key]

Which invalidates any possibility of identifying the designer if he is supernatural.

ID isn't about identifying the designer, it's about proving a the need of designer scientifically. The identity isn't part of ID,

That is a great answer.

See, all we can say, is there had to be "something" what that "something" is on the other hand is a matter of faith.

God Bless

Key

 

[ReformedChapin]

ID isn't about identifying the designer, it's about proving a the need of designer scientifically. The identity isn't part of ID, it could be any God or aliens.

I would agree that methodological naturalism means we can't gather any information on God through science. That is why we need Jesus and the bible. Science is, however, gathering information about God's creation, through which we can learn something of him, in the same way studying a work of art tells you about the artist.

I never stated ID's purpose was to prove who was the designer.

BTW to show the designer we should use a complete systematized proofs ranging from science, philosphy and theology.