Methodological Naturalism

SyamsuScience isn't free to simply conjecture whatever it wants out of the blue.All new ideas must be weighed in relation to what we already know.You cannot just come along and propose a line of thinking which is contrary to established reality.For instance,the models of gravity produced from Einstein predicted numerous phenomena before they were observed in nature.You don't further scientific knowledge without going from the foundations that are already there.If you have an idea which is contradictory to present models that is good,however,this does not mean it is right.Your model must not only either explain the same range of phenomena better than the present one it must also have predictive powers as well that can show us what to look for in the natural world that establishes some level of certainty to its "correctness".[This message has been edited by sidelined, 11-14-2003]

Syamsu"Nonmaterial that would be energy for instance"What do you define energy to be then?------------------
"Nature uses only the longest threads to weave her patterns, so that each small piece of her fabric reveals the organization of the entire tapestry."

HolmesI need to reiterate here that energy and matter are not interchangeable.The equation states that energy is equal to massmultiplied by the velocity of light squared.------------------
"Nature uses only the longest threads to weave her patterns, so that each small piece of her fabric reveals the organization of the entire tapestry."

holmesMass is the measure of inertia and is a property of matter.As I said the equation deals with energy and mass being interchangeable not energy and matter.

NosyNedActually as I understand it the distinction is necessary in physics.
Matter has properties such as volume,weight,density as well as mass.Now if we substitute matter for mass in E=MC*2 we must then assume that these properties are included in the equivalence transfer and I am sure that is wrong.For example when a bullet is fired from a gun it gains mass in exact relation to the amount of energy introduced but the other properties remain unchanged.If these other properties did change I believe we would live in a very different world.Suppose these other properties of matter were to change in same way as mass what would the effect be?------------------
"Nature uses only the longest threads to weave her patterns, so that each small piece of her fabric reveals the organization of the entire tapestry."

Syamsu Purpose is constructed not given. So you are going to die,big deal, you only have to face it once. Ride hard die fast and leave a good looking corpse. Why do you belittle the wonder of life because it is temporary? Why make yourself miserable? It puts it where it belongs,squarely in our laps.We are the ones who determine what is good and evil in our lives.The laws of society are a result of a balancing out or averaging the relative views of good and evil by the population as a whole into a "working" system. Science says there are varying levels of certainty but this does not mean we are without understanding.It only means that there is no precise way in which we can show how nature works absolutely because nature does not work with absolutes. The laws of gravitational acceleration state that if you step off an 80 story building you will accelerate at 9.8 meters per second for every second you are in flight. The electromagnetic force will bring your acceleration to a screeching halt an instant after contact all in accordance with laws that we are not 100% sure of. The laws of inertia which we are really in the dark about will continue to accelerate your organs and the trailing edge of your body even as the part of your body first contacting the ground accelerates in the opposite direction as per Newtonian laws.Of course you may pray to God to allow you and any people you wish to convince that He can demonstrate to the whole world that these laws are at His command and convince everybody beyond a reasonable shadow of a doubt.Have him alter one of these laws to prevent your being killed.Then find yourself a nice tall building and fly.------------------
"Nature uses only the longest threads to weave her patterns, so that each small piece of her fabric reveals the organization of the entire tapestry."[This message has been edited by sidelined, 11-17-2003][This message has been edited by sidelined, 11-17-2003]

SyamsuI do not understand what you mean by leaving good and evil out of science since science is neutral on the subject except perhaps when we try to understand the biological basis of violence and altruism and how the brain mediates these aspects of our lives.Surely you do not believe scientists are incapable of good or evil.They are but this is not because they are scientists but because they are human.All good and evil is the result of human beings making choices.That an act is evil is because it is not accepted by society as a whole even if you as an individual do believe the action to be evil.You seem to believe that the material world is unimportant.How so? The universe is immensely vast and a great deal of that vastness is off limits to human beings either through distance or through lethal factors present therein.Why would the material world dwarf us so if it had no value?Why would we ignore our ability to understand its inner workings?Why are you so threatened?------------------
"Physics is like sex. Sure, it may give some practical results, but that's not why we do it."[This message has been edited by sidelined, 11-19-2003][This message has been edited by sidelined, 11-20-2003]

SyamsuI posted this To which you replied Explain to me how good and evil are anything but the choices of human beings.

SyamsuI posted this. Now you state Can you please defend your statement?