Joralex,
Which specific metaphysic are you referring to?
The one that evolution, but no other science is guilty of. You tell me.
Answering your question directly (and skipping over many relevant/important points) : in a sense, they aren't. However, it must be understood that these conclusions do have a metaphysical foundation. Most Naturalists aren't even aware of, let alone acknowledge, this foundation.
So basically, evolution is OK because it is as metaphysical as the rest of science?
Specifically, I am troubled with the insinuation that I am "appealing to authority". If it were possible to insult me, I'd find that insinuation 'insulting'.
Are you really? It's
much worse than a common or garden appeal to authority, you haven't even established that the people concerned agree with you.
Your argument is of the form: I assert XXX, here is a list of names.
Lest you forget:
quote:
You would do well to read Rudolf Carnap, Carl Hempel, Thomas Kuhn, Max Black, Ernest Nagel, Baruch Brody, Karl Popper, Grover Maxwell, John Kemeny, P.K. Feyerabend, Marshal Spector, and Israel Scheffler - to name just a few. The writings of these 20th century men went a long way towards establishing the philosophical foundations of modern science.
Why do they agree with you? Or don't they assert that evolutionary theory suffers from metaphysics any more than the rest of science, after all?
Mark
™ Version 4.2