Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Last Visible Dog
This sums up this debate quite nicely - it is the battle of the dogmas. In this corner we have the Dogma of Deity in which design is the first assumption on which all arguments are based. And in this corner we have the Dogma of Materialism in which materialism is the first assumption on which all arguments are based.

Science is not philosophical strong materialism. Science concerns itself with material explanations of material phenomenon, because that's the function of science. Science has neither the competence, nor the interest to formulate opinions for or against the notion that God guides each little sperm to each little egg, by materially indetectable supernatural intervention.

The only pitched battle here is in the overactive, paranoid imaginations of creationists.

672 posted on 12/06/2005 12:34:03 PM PST by donh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 627 | View Replies ]


To: donh
Science is not philosophical strong materialism.

But the assumptions are

Science concerns itself with material explanations of material phenomenon, because that's the function of science.

Just as I said - many start from assumptions. Some start from the assumption of a deity and some start from the assumption of Materialism. Both are assumptions and both function as dogma. I think science is better defined as "the investigation or study of nature through observation and reasoning aimed at finding out the truth". Your definition sounds more like Materialistic dogma - your aim does not seem to be finding the truth but the reinforcement of the Dogma of Materialism. The purpose of science is to find the truth - seems the purpose of science as you define it is to find materialist answers to support materialistic dogma.

Science has neither the competence, nor the interest to formulate opinions for or against the notion that God guides each little sperm to each little egg, by materially indetectable supernatural intervention.

What the heck is that supposed to mean? Science studies nature through observation and reason - not through assuming all answers are materialistic in nature (even if materialism turns out to be correct AFTER true scientific study)

The only pitched battle here is in the overactive, paranoid imaginations of creationists...

...and the extreme denial of the proprietors of the Dogma of Materialism

Maybe all there is in the universe is Materialism but I think science must use the scientific method rather than just assuming.

696 posted on 12/06/2005 2:05:36 PM PST by Last Visible Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 672 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson