Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,913 Year: 4,170/9,624 Month: 1,041/974 Week: 368/286 Day: 11/13 Hour: 0/0


EvC Forum ⇒ Science Forums ⇒ Is It Science? ⇒

God, Naturalism, and Science

Thread ▼ Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   God, Naturalism, and Science
Blue Jay
Member (Idle past 2728 days)
Posts: 2843
From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts
Joined: 02-04-2008

Normal Thread Display

(1)
Message 6 of 10 (527863)
10-02-2009 10:28 PM 		Reply to: Message 1 by Teapots&unicorns
10-01-2009 4:34 PM

Hi, T&U.
​
Teapots&unicorns writes:
​
Science is not such a strict thing as people here think... What I am asking is this: If God(s) revealed him/themselves to us today, then wouldn't scientists everywhere work to understand how he does what he does?
​
I don't think anybody (at least anybody worth mentioning) defines science such that it excludes God in principle. But, it's not the principle of a God that the religious adhere to, but the uncompromising belief in a specific, but implausible, model of God that is rejected by science.
​
No real scientist would have a problem acknowledging a God who was objectively evidenced in the natural world, and no one would define "science" such that it excludes such a God.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Teapots&unicorns, posted 10-01-2009 4:34 PM Teapots&unicorns has not replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by slevesque, posted 10-03-2009 1:08 AM Blue Jay has replied
  
Blue Jay
Member (Idle past 2728 days)
Posts: 2843
From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts
Joined: 02-04-2008

Normal Thread Display
Message 9 of 10 (527874)
10-03-2009 1:32 AM 		Reply to: Message 8 by slevesque
10-03-2009 1:08 AM

Hi, Slevesque.
​
slevesque writes:
​
Be careful with the fallacy of reification here, 'science' doesn't reject anything. Scientist reject, as they are the ones defining what science is and is not.
Be careful with the fallacy of reification here, 'science' doesn't reject anything. Scientist reject, as they are the ones defining what science is and is not.
​
It's not reification: "science" is as much a profession (i.e., a community of people) as an abstract concept. I anthropomorphized it in an effort to avoid sounding like I'm trying to speak for every single scientist in the world.
​
-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)
​
Darwin loves you.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by slevesque, posted 10-03-2009 1:08 AM slevesque has not replied
  
Date format: mm-dd-yyyy
Timezone: ET (US)
  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024