• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
  • We hope the site problems here are now solved, however, if you still have any issues, please start a ticket in Contact Us

Science and Materialism

Oct 21, 2003
6,793
3,289
Central Time Zone
✟122,193.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Richard Lewontin is a prominent american scientist (geneticist) and was a professor at Harvard until 1998. He's done a lot of work in evolutionary biology. He said this about the relationship between the philosophical position of materialism and the practice of science:

‘Our willingness to accept scientific claims that are against common sense is the key to an understanding of the real struggle between science and the supernatural. We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism.

It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door."

I feel sorry for materialist Scientists who depend on non-material laws of logic all throughout their materialistic Scientific endeavors combined with the Scientific method to reach conclusions. I also have to feel sorry for them in assuming unguided naturalistic evolution, on what basis should the future be like the past when random purposeless "chance" is presumed? :sigh:
 
Upvote 0

Freodin

Devout believer in a theologically different God
Mar 9, 2002
15,713
3,762
Germany, Bavaria, Middle Franconia
Visit site
✟260,281.00
Faith
Atheist
Christianity is an alternative to materialism. It assumes that the material world is the creation of an immaterial person. In materialism, the world is fundamentally impersonal as everything - including persons - can be broken down into impersonal elements. But in Christianity, the world is fundamentally personal because the person of the Creator stands behind everything that happens.
Which leads directly to the objection that I mentioned.

"Persons". How do they work, when you cannot "break them down to impersonal elements"?

There is no reasonable answer to that. It assumed that "person" does whatever you need for your non-materialistic view to function. And that is not an answer to any question.
 
Upvote 0

Freodin

Devout believer in a theologically different God
Mar 9, 2002
15,713
3,762
Germany, Bavaria, Middle Franconia
Visit site
✟260,281.00
Faith
Atheist
I feel sorry for materialist Scientists who depend on non-material laws of logic all throughout their materialistic Scientific endeavors combined with the Scientific method to reach conclusions. I also have to feel sorry for them in assuming unguided naturalistic evolution, on what basis should the future be like the past when random purposeless "chance" is presumed? :sigh:
Perhaps you just have a too-narrow view of "materialism"?

And I have to admit I have no idea why the thought the "the future should be like the past" is or isn't part of "materialism", or why someone would or should be "sorry" if it is or isn't.
 
Upvote 0
Oct 21, 2003
6,793
3,289
Central Time Zone
✟122,193.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
By Christian definition, God is immaterial, thus beyond scrutiny of science.

Personally I think a better (or more accurate) way of describing the same concept is, God is not bound to or by the material. The Son of God had/has a material body, but the Creator is beyond the scrutiny of the creature. On this thought or line of immaterial thinking, miraculous is the day a Scientist captures the wind in an enclosure that he could open this same box and release it. :)
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

HitchSlap

PROUDLY PRIMATE
Aug 6, 2012
14,723
5,468
✟288,596.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Personally I think a better (or more accurate) way of describing the same concept is, God is not bound to or by the material. The Son of God had/has a material body, but the Creator is beyond the scrutiny of the creature. On this thought or line of immaterial thinking, miraculous is the day a Scientist captures the wind in an enclosure that he could open this same box and release it. :)
God moves in mysterious ways?
 
Upvote 0

Freodin

Devout believer in a theologically different God
Mar 9, 2002
15,713
3,762
Germany, Bavaria, Middle Franconia
Visit site
✟260,281.00
Faith
Atheist
I don't understand the question. Could you rephrase?
Let's try to compare it with the "materialistic" counterpart.

What is "matter"? You could define it is as something that has an existence in spacetime, follows certain basic rules and excerts certain influences on other "matter".

These things are distinguishable, but not seperable. You cannot seperate the "influence" that "matter" excerts from its existence in spacetime. This "influence" or these "certain basic rules" might in itself be consider "immaterial", but as they don't have any independent existence, there fundamentally "is" nothing immaterial.

And now consider a "person". We can find out how "matter" works, by studying these attributes. Can we do something similar with "person"? Can we find certain attributes that make up a "person"? Can we study these attributes to find out how a "person" does what it does?

If yes, the this "person" would just be a different system of "materialism", replacing the basic structure with different attributes.
If no... this "person" would not be a reasonable alternative to materialism.
 
Upvote 0
Oct 21, 2003
6,793
3,289
Central Time Zone
✟122,193.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
God moves in mysterious ways?

Why not? He is God afterall. The Spirit of God is compared to wind in Scripture. We can feel the effects of the wind, we can hear the wind, but we cannot see it. Technologies have increased our ability to see and hear, and even corrected previous assumptions through them, so it is a bit much to think everything can be accounted for or explained by applying the five senses.
 
Upvote 0

Tree of Life

Hide The Pain
Feb 15, 2013
8,824
6,252
✟55,667.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Married
Can we do something similar with "person"? Can we find certain attributes that make up a "person"? Can we study these attributes to find out how a "person" does what it does?

Can we find attributes that make up God? No. We cannot "find" God. Anything we know about God must be revealed. God has revealed himself through his creation and through other means, so we have access to this revelation only because God has given it.

Can we study God's attributes to find out how God works? Yes we can study what God has revealed about himself. But we can only ever apprehend God based on the revelation he has given. We can never fully comprehend God such that we have any sort of mastery over him.

God is not a creature. He is not made of anything nor does he depend upon anything outside of himself like time or space. God created both time and space. Time and space are creatures that depend on God for their existence. They have no necessary existence of their own.

This is very different from naturalism or materialism which denies that time and space is created and denies that there is anything outside of time and space that can determine what happens in time and space.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pioneer3mm
Upvote 0

Tree of Life

Hide The Pain
Feb 15, 2013
8,824
6,252
✟55,667.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Married
Name one thing we can account for without using our senses.

We can know that 2+2=4 without the use of senses. We can also know that other minds exist without using senses. Sense experience does not help us to know moral truths. These are discerned in other ways.
 
Upvote 0

com7fy8

Well-Known Member
May 22, 2013
14,963
6,713
Massachusetts
✟668,492.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
And besides, they would never find God by mere reasoning. Not ever.

They would need a leap of faith, and to seek Him with "all of your heart" as He said.

He is a scientist who believes that science is the best way to gain knowledge.

The Universe is simply physics in action.

This is because He is a being, not an object. (risking to oversimplify, my simplification is He's a conscious being able to choose whether to interact with us. Therefore, He does so only voluntarily if we meet His criteria of...loving trust in the Good, that is trust in God, aka 'faith', even if just a while, and then willing to seek Him with all of our heart in that moment.)
Romans 11:33 says God's ways are "past finding out." So, creation is operating according to God's ways which can not be found out. We might discover certain things, but always there is more which we do not find out. In medicine, ones keep discovering this, among other examples.

Ones have not figured out psychiatric problems enough so they can cure them. This is partly because the ways of personality are rooted in what is not physical, by the way.

But someone can sit by oneself and think only of what comes to that person's mind and draw a conclusion using only what can come to his or her mind.
 
Upvote 0

HitchSlap

PROUDLY PRIMATE
Aug 6, 2012
14,723
5,468
✟288,596.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
We can know that 2+2=4 without the use of senses. We can also know that other minds exist without using senses. Sense experience does not help us to know moral truths. These are discerned in other ways.
Please explain how we know 2+2=4 without using our senses?
 
Upvote 0

Tree of Life

Hide The Pain
Feb 15, 2013
8,824
6,252
✟55,667.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Married
Please explain how we know 2+2=4 without using our senses?

It is self evident. It is not an empirical truth that we discover from looking at the world, but a mathematical truth that we discover from thinking. We furthermore conclude that 2+2=4 is necessarily true and is true everywhere in the universe. This is obviously something that cannot be empirically proven, but it is something that we know nonetheless.
 
Upvote 0

jayem

Naturalist
Jun 24, 2003
15,429
7,164
74
St. Louis, MO.
✟426,066.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Do you likewise say that naturalism is an assumption for you and not the result of reasoning or empiricism?

First, I'll define naturalism as I see it. It's the concept that everything in the universe is purely a function of matter/energy and the fundamental forces of nature. Nothing supernatural exists. Which would be an entity that is claimed to be outside of, or beyond the natural realm. But has the ability to reach into the natural world and affect events therein.

I know I can't prove this with absolute metaphysical certainty. Naturalism, like god-belief, requires faith. In my case, that faith is a result of reasoning. Inductive reasoning to be specific. Our brains evolved to seek explanations. When one wasn't obvious, we created gods, spirits, or other supernatural entities to account for what we didn't understand. Thousands of such gods, in all cultures, have been created to explain things like weather, diseases, tidal action, floods, earthquakes, the change of the seasons, the motion of the sun, moon, and stars, and all other events that seemed inexplicable. But as our knowledge has increased, we know that all of these are perfectly natural phenomena. In all of history, a god, or supernatural force has never been a valid explanation for anything. So--by simple a posteriori logic--why should I believe any kind of supernatural power or god is responsible for all the things we still don't understand?

BTW: I'm certain that we never will be able to explain everything. The more we learn, the more questions will arise. But that's OK. That's what makes seeking to understand nature and nature's mechanisms exciting. The thrill is in the journey, not the destination.
 
Upvote 0

HitchSlap

PROUDLY PRIMATE
Aug 6, 2012
14,723
5,468
✟288,596.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
It is self evident. It is not an empirical truth that we discover from looking at the world, but a mathematical truth that we discover from thinking. We furthermore conclude that 2+2=4 is necessarily true and is true everywhere in the universe. This is obviously something that cannot be empirically proven, but it is something that we know nonetheless.
Sure. But please explain how you know this is true without using your senses.
 
Upvote 0

Tree of Life

Hide The Pain
Feb 15, 2013
8,824
6,252
✟55,667.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Married
First, I'll define naturalism as I see it. It's the concept that everything in the universe is purely a function of matter/energy and the fundamental forces of nature. Nothing supernatural exists. Which would be an entity that is claimed to be outside of, or beyond the natural realm. But has the ability to reach into the natural world and affect events therein.

I know I can't prove this with absolute metaphysical certainty. Naturalism, like god-belief, requires faith. In my case, that faith is a result of reasoning. Inductive reasoning to be specific. Our brains evolved to seek explanations. When one wasn't obvious, we created gods, spirits, or other supernatural entities to account for what we didn't understand. Thousands of such gods, in all cultures, have been created to explain things like weather, diseases, tidal action, floods, earthquakes, the change of the seasons, the motion of the sun, moon, and stars, and all other events that seemed inexplicable. But as our knowledge has increased, we know that all of these are perfectly natural phenomena. In all of history, a god, or supernatural force has never been a valid explanation for anything. So--by simple a posteriori logic--why should I believe any kind of supernatural power or god is responsible for all the things we still don't understand?

BTW: I'm certain that we never will be able to explain everything. The more we learn, the more questions will arise. But that's OK. That's what makes seeking to understand nature and nature's mechanisms exciting. The thrill is in the journey, not the destination.

This is a nice story that is based on an assumption of naturalism. But you began the story with the assumption of naturalism. You did not start with a blank slate and then reason your way to a naturalistic conclusion. You started with naturalism and ended with (surprise, surprise) naturalism.
 
Upvote 0

Tree of Life

Hide The Pain
Feb 15, 2013
8,824
6,252
✟55,667.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Married
Sure. But please explain how you know this is true without using your senses.

A person who is deprived of senses may know it is true because it is a rational truth. We know it is true because it would be rationally impossible for it to be untrue.

Edit: Another way to put it - I may know it is true simply by thinking about the number 4. A similar exercise would be to think about a triangle. We know that the internal angles of every triangle will always add up to 180 degrees. We've never actually seen a true triangle out in the world nor do we need to in order to know this truth. The truth is implicit in the idea of the triangle. We know it simply by thinking about what a triangle is.
 
Upvote 0
Oct 21, 2003
6,793
3,289
Central Time Zone
✟122,193.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Name one thing we can account for without using our senses.

Thought, rules of thought, laws of logic. These are required for meaningful coherent use of our senses, often taken for granted.
 
Upvote 0