Philo 3 (2):30-37 (2000)
|Abstract||According to Eugenie Scott, methodological materialism---the view that science attempts to explain the world using material processes---does not imply philosophical materialism---the view that all that exists are material processes. Thus one can consistently be both a scientist and a theist. According to Phillip Johnson, however, methodological materialism presupposes philosophical materialism. Consequently, scientists are unable to see the cogency of supernatural explanations, like creationism. I argue that both Scott and Johnson are wrong: scientists are not limited to explaining tbe world using material processes and science does not presuppose materialism. Thus scientists’ rejection of creationism is not irrational|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Glenn Branch (2002). In Defense of Methodological Naturalism. Philo 5 (2):249-255.
Piotr Bylica & Dariusz Sagan (2008). God, Design, and Naturalism: Implications of Methodological Naturalism in Science for Science–Religion Relation. Pensamiento 64:621-38.
Christopher H. Pearson (2010). Methodological Naturalism, Intelligent Design, and Lessons From the History of Embryology. Philo 13 (1):67-79.
Reed Richter (2002). What Science Can and Cannot Say: The Problems with Methodological Naturalism. Reports of the National Center for Science Education 22 (Jan-Apr 2002):18-22.
Theodore Schick Jr, (2000). Methodological Naturalism Vs. Methodological Realism. Philo 3 (2):30-37.
S. Muhammad-Taqīy Mudarrisī (2011). Methodology of Augustinian Science. Methodology of Social Sciences and Humanities (69):7-39.
Penelope Maddy (1995). Naturalism and Ontology. Philosophia Mathematica 3 (3):248-270.
Michael Rea (2004). Replies to Critics. Philo 7 (2):163-175.
Maarten Boudry, Stefaan Blancke & Johan Braeckman (2010). How Not to Attack Intelligent Design Creationism: Philosophical Misconceptions About Methodological Naturalism. [REVIEW] Foundations of Science 15 (3):227-244.
Michael Bradie (2009). What's Wrong with Methodological Naturalism? Human Affairs 19 (2):126 - 137.
Robert T. Pennock (1996). Naturalism, Evidence and Creationism: The Case of Phillip Johnson. [REVIEW] Biology and Philosophy 11 (4):543-559.
Mark Newman (2010). Beyond Structural Realism: Pluralist Criteria for Theory Evaluation. Synthese 174 (3):413 - 443.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2011-01-09
Total downloads1 ( #291,386 of 722,837 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #60,541 of 722,837 )
How can I increase my downloads?