Authors
Yunus Prasetya
Baylor University
Abstract
Several metaphysical naturalists argue that the success of science, together with the claim that scientists adhere to methodological naturalism, amounts to strong evidence for metaphysical naturalism. I call this the scientific-success argument. It is argued that the scientific-success argument is similar to the no-miracles argument for realism in philosophy of science. On the no-miracles argument, the success of science is taken as strong evidence that scientific theories are true. Based on this similarity, some considerations relevant to one argument may also be relevant to the other. One particular consideration is explored. The selectionist response to the no-miracles argument states that on an evolutionary model of science, in which scientific theories are accepted only after surviving a rigorous selection process, the no-miracles argument fails. The selectionist response also applies to the scientific-success argument. If scientific theories are selected for success, we do not need to explain the success of science by appealing to metaphysical naturalism.
Keywords methodological naturalism  success of science  no miracles argument  scientific realism  Arguments against theism
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.24204/ejpr.2021.3403
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

 PhilArchive page | Other versions
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

The Scientific Image.William Demopoulos & Bas C. van Fraassen - 1982 - Philosophical Review 91 (4):603.
Inference to the Best Explanation.Peter Lipton - 1991 - London and New York: Routledge.
The Logic of Scientific Discovery.Karl Popper - 1959 - Studia Logica 9:262-265.
Inference to the Best Explanation.Peter Lipton - 2007 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 74 (2):421-423.

View all 40 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

How Successful is Naturalism?Michael C. Rea - 2007 - In Georg Gasser (ed.), How Successful is Naturalism? Ontos-Verlag. pp. 105-116.
Methodological Naturalism and its Misconceptions.Tiddy Smith - 2017 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 82 (3):321-336.
A Puzzle About Naturalism.Alexander Paseau - 2010 - Metaphilosophy 41 (5):642-648.
Philosophical Naturalism at the Turn of the Century.Robert Audi - 2000 - Journal of Philosophical Research 25:27-45.
Philosophical Naturalism at the Turn of the Century.Robert Audi - 2000 - Journal of Philosophical Research 25:27-45.
Methodological Naturalism and the Truth Seeking Objection.Erkki Vesa Rope Kojonen - 2017 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 81 (3):335-355.
What Science Can and Cannot Say: The Problems with Methodological Naturalism.Reed Richter - 2002 - Reports of the National Center for Science Education 22 (Jan-Apr 2002):18-22.
How Successful is Naturalism?Georg Gasser (ed.) - 2007 - Ontos Verlag.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2021-08-05

Total views
199 ( #58,304 of 2,505,160 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
105 ( #6,928 of 2,505,160 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes