truth above all else said:
No, it demands that natural causes must be found because it is science.
Upvote
0
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.
truth above all else said:absolutely although there is a subtle difference, evolutionary philosophy demands that natural causes must be found because it has no Christian foundation
Mocca said:I agree with all of it except for the part about how you say it is an assumption that it is neccessary for science. Without it, FSM is just as viable as evolution.
Silent Bob said:I think it is the way I worded it and not what I meant that you disagree with. Methodological naturalism is necessary IF you want to be in the realm of science. In a way if you want to be part of something then you need to play with it's rules. A rule of science is methodological naturalism, it is an assumption that you must agree with in order to be within science.
birdan said:It's important to realize that methodological naturalism is not only an assumption within science, but also delineates the boundaries where science can be exercised (effectively anyway). Science (all science and not just evolution) seeks natural explanations for natural phenomena. Natural explanations pertains to the methodology of science, and natural phenomena pertains to the boundaries of science.
The concept of uniformitarianism (existing forces having operated uniformly from the origin of the universe to the present time) is a weaker case of scientific 'assumption', since variations in fundamental forces, energies, particles, etc. can be measured very precisely, with no indication of mutability. But beyond that, yes, it is an assumption of all science (again not just evolution), and without it arguments such as Dad's split/merge diatribe become just as valid as science. Along with 'Last Thursdayism' and the Matrix movies. Without uniformitarianism, science loses its predictive capabilities, and since science has shown itself to be highly predictive in nature, uniformitarianism appears to be a valid assumption.
Science also indirectly accepts all the assumptions (axioms) of number theory. Again, since these work in all cases without exception, they seem to be very good assumptions.
nvxplorer said:Would he do better to summon the motor gods?
nvxplorer said:Is my mechanic presupposing that he can diagnose my car problems with tools and instruments? Would he do better to summon the motor gods?
I specifically meant number theory, since there are 'assumptions' involved there upon which mathematics is based. Pure mathematics wouldn't get too far without the basis of number theory, and number theory wouldn't get too far without its basic axioms.Mocca said:Number theory? Number theory is the branch of mathematics concerning integers and their properties. Do you mean pure mathematics in general?
Yes, that is my point. Whether a scientist or a mechanic use presuppositions is irrelevant. The fact is, methodological naturalism works. The word “presupposition” is bandied about by creationists as if it’s a bad thing, an error in judgement. Humans cannot function without the myriad presuppositions required in daily life. We learn by experience. The mechanic learns that a missing motor may be caused by a bad spark plug, and he acts accordingly. The scientist has learned that the scientific method can produce knowledge. It’s that simple. If we must classify these methods as presuppositions, I must ask, “So what?”Mocca said:Well, he knows how cars work and he's fixed cars before so it isn't a presupposition that he can diagnose your car problems.
That is, if he can.
And if creationism could produce useful knowledge, Id support it vigorously.Silent Bob said:If some ritual dance could fix your car I think it would be a much cheaper alternative to replacing parts.
truth above all else said:absolutely although there is a subtle difference, evolutionary philosophy demands that natural causes must be found because it has no Christian foundation
nvxplorer said:Is my mechanic presupposing that he can diagnose my car problems with tools and instruments? Would he do better to summon the motor gods?
I'd like to ask the Creationists... or rather, anyone, what are the presuppositions of evolutionists?
MarkT said:That all forms of life are related. The classification system creates the illusion. Apparently that's what science is trying to prove but there's really no other reason to presuppose it.
TheInstant said:But it's not a presupposition, it's based on evidence. Would you say that the theory of gravity is based on the presupposition that things fall down?
You probably should learn what a presupposition is before participating in a thread about presuppositions.MarkT said:That all forms of life are related. The classification system creates the illusion. Apparently that's what science is trying to prove but there's really no other reason to presuppose it.
But it's not a presupposition, it's based on evidence. Would you say that the theory of gravity is based on the presupposition that things fall down?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?