Questions for Critics of Methodological Naturalism
|August 18, 2016||Posted by johnnyb under Creationism, Evolutionary biology, Intelligent Design, Naturalism, Philosophy|
The question of whether methodological naturalism is an idea worth holding onto in science has been one that the ID camp, as a whole, is not unified on. Some think that methodological naturalism is a perfectly valid way to define science, and that ID fits nicely within that scope. Others think that methodological naturalism is just philosophical baggage hitching a free ride and should be discarded.
To those who are critics of methodological naturalism, Dr. Joshua Swamidass, a biologist at Washington University in St. Louis, offers a defense of methodological naturalism as well as a series of questions for those who are critical of methodological naturalism to consider (update – my answers to these questions are here and here).
Since the launch of the Alternatives to Methodological Naturalism conference, Dr. Swamidass and I have been discussing methodological naturalism’s role in science, and we were both interested in how the ID community would respond to his questions. I will give my own responses in another post, but thought that this would be a good forum for thoughtful discussion from the community. Please read Dr. Swamidass’s article before commenting.
UPDATE – For those following this thread, I posted a followup story on my questions for the proponents of Methodological Naturalism.