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

To: GourmetDan
Basically, any theory that isn't based on the 'a priori' assumption of philosophical naturalism cannot be 'scientific' by definition

As a follow-up, can you name any current scientific endeavor or discovery that does NOT operate from an "a priori" assumption that all of nature has standard and rigorous rules that are predictable and discoverable? Just one, which has become a physical, tangible product or discovery.

25 posted on 11/25/2008 11:14:16 AM PST by freedumb2003 (Der neuen Fuhrer: AKA the Murdering Messiah: Keep your power dry, folks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]


To: freedumb2003
"As a follow-up, can you name any current scientific endeavor or discovery that does NOT operate from an "a priori" assumption that all of nature has standard and rigorous rules that are predictable and discoverable? Just one, which has become a physical, tangible product or discovery."

That is the fallacy of equivocating the existence of natural physical laws with the assumption of philosophical naturalism and there are absolutely no exceptions to it.

This does not make it any less a fallacy, however.

41 posted on 11/25/2008 11:56:07 AM PST by GourmetDan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | 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