pw201 + naturalism   8

Quine's Naturalism - 3:AM Magazine
"Sense data, Quine came to realize, are just as much theoretical posits as the electrons, bacteria, and chromosomes we supposedly construct from them. We do not see ‘patches of green, brown, and grey’ when we are walking through a forest; we see trees, logs, and squirrels. This is why it requires severe training to teach amateur painters to reproduce their everyday three-dimensional view of the world on a two-dimensional canvas."
quine  philosophy  naturalism  science  epistemology 
january 2019 by pw201
How not to attack Intelligent Design Creationism: Philosophical misconceptions about Methodological Naturalism - Maarten Boudry
"In recent controversies about Intelligent Design Creationism (IDC), the principle of methodological naturalism (MN) has played an important role. In this paper, an often neglected distinction is made between two different conceptions of MN, each with its respective rationale and with a different view on the proper role of MN in science. According to one popular conception, MN is a self-imposed or intrinsic limitation of science, which means that science is simply not equipped to deal with claims of the supernatural (Intrinsic MN or IMN). Alternatively, we will defend MN as a provisory and empirically grounded attitude of scientists, which is justified in virtue of the consistent success of naturalistic explanations and the lack of success of supernatural explanations in the history of science. (Provisory MN or PMN). Science does have a bearing on supernatural hypotheses, and its verdict is uniformly negative."
creationism  intelligent-design  religion  science  naturalism  philosophy 
february 2012 by pw201
Scientific presuppositions and the supernatural « Just Another Deisidaimon
Konrad Talmont-Kaminski on the metaphysical/methodological naturalism distinction, which he thinks is a distortion of actual naturalist views: "it effectively assumes the primacy of ontology over epistemology... assumes that to understand science one must begin with the ontology of science. This is very much understandable from the point of view of someone who was brought up on a Christian religion that is presented as having its basis in a number of ontological claims that must be taken as true. It is also a profound misunderstanding of what science is. It would be better to think of science in terms of various methods that are used to investigate the world. The scientific ontology is an a posteriori result of the application of those methods to the world. To put it in other terms again, ontological naturalism is the a posteriori result of accepting epistemic naturalism. Yet, even that is not quite right as it suggests that science can be identified in terms of some set of methods."
philosophy  science  religion  epistemology  naturalism 
december 2011 by pw201
CPBD 089: John Shook – Dewey, Quine, and Some Varieties of Naturalism
John Shook talks to Luke Muehlhauser about philosophical naturalism (with a transcript, for those of you who hate podcasts). Interesting to find about the various naturalistic philosophies, and to see the responses to the supernaturalist "you naturalists think everything is just atoms" argument.
philosophy  naturalism  science  physics  materialism 
september 2011 by pw201
Is there anything wrong with “God of the gaps” reasoning? by Robert Larmer
Larmer argues that both theists and atheists shouldn't be so hard on "God of the Gaps" explanations (the phrase originated as a criticism of Christians by Christians). While it's certainly true that it's not a formal fallacy, I think what makes me uneasy about such explanations is the ease with which "the thing which explains X" is identified with "the Christian God" (say). But I'll have to think about it some more.
theology  philosophy  naturalism  science  religion  god  gaps  larmer  robert-larmer 
february 2010 by pw201
Know Your Godless Heathen Positions
"It has become common, especially for the critics of atheism, to conflate atheism, materialism, naturalism, evolution, and natural selection. Then, an objection to one of these positions is taken to undermine all of them. This would be a mistake since there are several distinct positions here that the atheist may or may not also accept. And much of the energy that has been expended to knock them down is wasted because several of them turn out to be compatible with theism. Let’s clarify:"
science  philosophy  atheism  matt-mccormick  materialism  naturalism  evolution 
january 2010 by pw201
The Disenchanted Naturalist’s Guide to Reality
Alex Rosenberg argues that scientism is a good thing, and puts forward a very reductionist naturalism which he applies to consciousness, morality and a bunch of other stuff philosophers like to worry about. His fellow naturalists disagree in the comments (notably, Richard Carrier and Tom Clark produce good arguments against him).
naturalism  philosophy  science  reductionism  morality  consciousness 
november 2009 by pw201
Defining the Supernatural
Richard Carrier argues that asserting that "supernatural stuff is stuff which is untestable" is wrong, and that what most people mean by "supernatural" is minds which are not reducable to non-mental causes.
science  philosophy  carrier  richard-carrier  supernatural  naturalism 
october 2008 by pw201

Copy this bookmark: