Even though agnosticism is probably and arguably the most rational of all positions!
Seraphim23
JoinedPosts by Seraphim23
-
71
Theism Makes Science Impossible
by cofty init is not impossible to be a great scientist and a theist - kenneth miller and francis collins are good examples.. however, science depends on methodological naturalism - a working assumption that there are natural causes for observed effects.
please note that methodological naturalism is not the same as ontological naturalism.
in other words scientists may believe in a spirit world or not as long as god is never invoked as an answer.. contrast this with theism which, unlike deism, declares god to be immanent and active in the world.. consider a scientist who is also a theist doing research into the efficacy of a new drug that cures heart disease.
-
-
-
71
Theism Makes Science Impossible
by cofty init is not impossible to be a great scientist and a theist - kenneth miller and francis collins are good examples.. however, science depends on methodological naturalism - a working assumption that there are natural causes for observed effects.
please note that methodological naturalism is not the same as ontological naturalism.
in other words scientists may believe in a spirit world or not as long as god is never invoked as an answer.. contrast this with theism which, unlike deism, declares god to be immanent and active in the world.. consider a scientist who is also a theist doing research into the efficacy of a new drug that cures heart disease.
-
-
Seraphim23
Thank God for that.
-
71
Theism Makes Science Impossible
by cofty init is not impossible to be a great scientist and a theist - kenneth miller and francis collins are good examples.. however, science depends on methodological naturalism - a working assumption that there are natural causes for observed effects.
please note that methodological naturalism is not the same as ontological naturalism.
in other words scientists may believe in a spirit world or not as long as god is never invoked as an answer.. contrast this with theism which, unlike deism, declares god to be immanent and active in the world.. consider a scientist who is also a theist doing research into the efficacy of a new drug that cures heart disease.
-
-
Seraphim23
Indeed it does but never mind.
-
71
Theism Makes Science Impossible
by cofty init is not impossible to be a great scientist and a theist - kenneth miller and francis collins are good examples.. however, science depends on methodological naturalism - a working assumption that there are natural causes for observed effects.
please note that methodological naturalism is not the same as ontological naturalism.
in other words scientists may believe in a spirit world or not as long as god is never invoked as an answer.. contrast this with theism which, unlike deism, declares god to be immanent and active in the world.. consider a scientist who is also a theist doing research into the efficacy of a new drug that cures heart disease.
-
-
Seraphim23
So why are you surprised at my predictability then?
-
71
Theism Makes Science Impossible
by cofty init is not impossible to be a great scientist and a theist - kenneth miller and francis collins are good examples.. however, science depends on methodological naturalism - a working assumption that there are natural causes for observed effects.
please note that methodological naturalism is not the same as ontological naturalism.
in other words scientists may believe in a spirit world or not as long as god is never invoked as an answer.. contrast this with theism which, unlike deism, declares god to be immanent and active in the world.. consider a scientist who is also a theist doing research into the efficacy of a new drug that cures heart disease.
-
-
Seraphim23
No I am suggesting that anecdotal evidence is not evidence to you at all because it doesn’t fit with scientific methodology, but then nor does free will fit with this either.
-
71
Theism Makes Science Impossible
by cofty init is not impossible to be a great scientist and a theist - kenneth miller and francis collins are good examples.. however, science depends on methodological naturalism - a working assumption that there are natural causes for observed effects.
please note that methodological naturalism is not the same as ontological naturalism.
in other words scientists may believe in a spirit world or not as long as god is never invoked as an answer.. contrast this with theism which, unlike deism, declares god to be immanent and active in the world.. consider a scientist who is also a theist doing research into the efficacy of a new drug that cures heart disease.
-
-
Seraphim23
I’m not the only one who is, but nevertheless I did offer if you were to play ball. However it seems anecdotal evidence will always be rejected unless it can be part of an experiment which edits out miracles by definition, even if true. So perhaps it’s best I don’t play ball with you.
-
71
Theism Makes Science Impossible
by cofty init is not impossible to be a great scientist and a theist - kenneth miller and francis collins are good examples.. however, science depends on methodological naturalism - a working assumption that there are natural causes for observed effects.
please note that methodological naturalism is not the same as ontological naturalism.
in other words scientists may believe in a spirit world or not as long as god is never invoked as an answer.. contrast this with theism which, unlike deism, declares god to be immanent and active in the world.. consider a scientist who is also a theist doing research into the efficacy of a new drug that cures heart disease.
-
-
Seraphim23
You won’t believe if I did provide those details because you don’t except anecdotal evidence unless it is part of a reproducible experiment. You need to tell me what the current definition of death is first of all.
-
71
Theism Makes Science Impossible
by cofty init is not impossible to be a great scientist and a theist - kenneth miller and francis collins are good examples.. however, science depends on methodological naturalism - a working assumption that there are natural causes for observed effects.
please note that methodological naturalism is not the same as ontological naturalism.
in other words scientists may believe in a spirit world or not as long as god is never invoked as an answer.. contrast this with theism which, unlike deism, declares god to be immanent and active in the world.. consider a scientist who is also a theist doing research into the efficacy of a new drug that cures heart disease.
-
-
Seraphim23
Oh dear indeed!
-
71
Theism Makes Science Impossible
by cofty init is not impossible to be a great scientist and a theist - kenneth miller and francis collins are good examples.. however, science depends on methodological naturalism - a working assumption that there are natural causes for observed effects.
please note that methodological naturalism is not the same as ontological naturalism.
in other words scientists may believe in a spirit world or not as long as god is never invoked as an answer.. contrast this with theism which, unlike deism, declares god to be immanent and active in the world.. consider a scientist who is also a theist doing research into the efficacy of a new drug that cures heart disease.
-
-
Seraphim23
OK cofty but I do think there are cases of miraculous healing, just not as often as perhaps mainstream theology would like to pedal. I even think resurrections still occur.
-
71
Theism Makes Science Impossible
by cofty init is not impossible to be a great scientist and a theist - kenneth miller and francis collins are good examples.. however, science depends on methodological naturalism - a working assumption that there are natural causes for observed effects.
please note that methodological naturalism is not the same as ontological naturalism.
in other words scientists may believe in a spirit world or not as long as god is never invoked as an answer.. contrast this with theism which, unlike deism, declares god to be immanent and active in the world.. consider a scientist who is also a theist doing research into the efficacy of a new drug that cures heart disease.
-
-
Seraphim23
Cofty I said general order, thus allowing for individual and specific instances of God acting in the physical world. These would exclude interfering in the case of scientific experiments.
Galaxie I am quite interested in the belief and non-belief debate as you surmise. I think that science is not the only rational enterprise out there but when it comes to the natural world and its perceived laws, I see this as evidence of something non-scientific because I don’t see science explaining science. Where did science come from or the natural laws as they are seen to work? The universe apparently did come from immaterial energy, even though no one really knows what this energy would look like without some kind of form.
When it comes to miracles I don’t see them as proof or scientific evidence but evidence of a non-scientific variety. Take the Turin shroud for an example. It is possibly the result of forgery or a natural process. However it could also be the result of a non-natural cause or miracle, as such things are called. Scientific enquiry will either come up with an unknown as the cause, or substitute a best scientific guess no matter how unlikely that guess might be. It can never say a miracle, as this is non-scientific by definition, even if it were a miracle. The evidence for a believer comes from how unlikely the scientific guess is and the amount of provenance connected to the event or object in question. It is not conclusive in the scientific sense but enough to convince beyond mere guess work. So in this sense it is down to one’s own judgement in these areas and even more so if the event is personal.