Life is a state, an experience, that everyone has and thinks they can recognize in other people and things. Yet no one can define it.
We are told that naturalism (materialism) in science only says, “You can’t study God.” In reality, naturalism does way more. The popular science media is a good place to observe that. The main thing it does is replace evidence with theory.
While Darwin may have doubted the fully naturalized mind and felt horrid, most of his latter-day supporters believe and feel good. And their faith is unshakeable.
For all practical purposes, today’s humans are orphans, seeking our roots via scraps and artifacts, many of unknown authenticity or significance.
The conventional picture of methodological naturalism (MN) is simply wrong. MN, far from letting evidence rule, actually discounts evidence and substitutes consensus based on its premises. The multiverse is but one example.
To understand the role of methodological naturalism, we need to see the full picture, not only what it forbids, but what it permits and encourages. And what their evidence status is.
Science “done without God” needs no evidence and need not even make sense. it just needs a number of key people to agree that it is “science.”
It is only an advantage in a negative sense: No one can disprove the aliens’ existence to a reasonable person’s satisfaction. That hardly explains the strong attachment to the idea, evident in the popular science media.
My neo-Darwinian friend, Francis Smallwood, has now written a response to my previous instalment in our dialogue. If you want to read it, go here. Below is a small excerpt of the response by Francis. You can read his full response by going to his blog. Follow the link at the bottom of the page. Read More…
Skepticism of the faculty lounge’s received opinion is no more likely a goal of theirs than constitutional liberty is a goal of the “soda ban” mayor or his friendly neighbourhood “evolved to need coercion” prof.
Says Donald Devine at the Library of Law and Liberty site, who sees materialism (naturalism) as a superstition, “the superstition of a naturalist science fully explaining human action.”
Chalk another one up to the damage done by methodological naturalism in its decay?: Unable to rid themselves of the conviction that there is more to life than the material or the natural, the naturalists end up carrying on about Satan and ghosts, and getting it all wrong even then.
Pearcey: Audiences often find these plays frustrating and depressing. More significantly, however, a deterministic worldview produces characters that are not true to life.
The same universe cannot hold Christ, if you agree that he exists, and “subhuman behaviour,” which argues for an entirely different human psychology than the Christian account.
Yet another wagon joins the Circus That Never Leaves Town.