Philosophically, "naturalism" or "meytaphysical naturalism" or =
"ontological naturalism" is basically the belief that only nature =
exists, that there is nothing beyond nature, no supernatural. (Nothing =
to do with the environment or clothing. :^> )
"Methodological naturalism" is an approach to science in which one uses =
permits only natural (vs. supernatural) objects and laws to play a role =
in one's theories. Metaphysical naturalists see this as the only way =
to go, obviously.
Metaphysical non-naturalists who adopt this typically do so for =
pragmatic reasons: historically, it's worked best this way, and =
theoretically, it's much easier to mathematically model nature than God, =
angels, etc.. It's something we can get a better handle on. If this =
means science is an in-principle potentially incomplete form of =
knowledge, so be it. Who claimed otherwise, and why is this a =
criticism? they'd ask.
"Scientism" is the belief that knowledge or rational belief come only =
through science (and especially not via any revelation, non-scientific =
intuition, etc.). This suffers from some self-referential problems, =
often. More often held by scientists than philosophers of science, and =
pretty much all who hold this belief are metaphysical as well as =
methodological naturalists.
----------
From: Steve Clark[SMTP:ssclark@facstaff.wisc.edu]
Sent: Sunday, December 15, 1996 5:58 pm
To: evolution@calvin.edu
Subject: re: a couple of questions
At 10:13 PM 12/14/96 -0500, Brian wrote:
>I continue to be confused in the way that several use the term
>methodological naturalism. Can anyone point to some references
>wherein this term is defined? My understanding is that methodological
>naturalism does not require the scientist to assume that nature
>is all there is when doing science. Rather, it is a recognition that
>the methods of science are limitted. Further, these limitations are
>inherent, not arbitrarily specified. Methodological naturalism in
>my view is the recognition that science is limitted. I promote it
>because it is very useful for weeding out metaphysical naturalism
>from science. Another error is to say that if the methods of science
>cannot detect something then that something is not real, or to
>say that if something is real then it can be detected by the methods
>of science. This I would call scientism.=20
I too have problems with the term, "methodological naturalism." It =
seems to
me that the term literally defines science. The realm of science =
knowldege
is naturalism, and a distinguishing feature of scientific knowledge is =
that
it is tested by empirical methods.
In order to more precisely describe "scientism," I suggest that we use =
the
term "metaphysical naturalism.."
Comments?
____________________________________________________________
Steven S. Clark, Ph.D . Phone: =
608/263-9137
Associate Professor FAX: =
608/263-4226
Dept. of Human Oncology and Email: =
ssclark@facstaff.wisc.edu
UW Comprehensive Cancer Center
CSC K4-432
600 Highland Ave.
Madison, WI 53792
____________________________________________________________