Re: [asa] on science and meta-science

Just a short observation and offering of a definition of 'naturalism'... To Moorad: why do you sometimes capitalise 'Nature' and sometimes just write 'nature'? Just curious... Also, waiting to hear about whether or not you promote 'reflexivity'. I agree with Murray's post entirely, which also supports Schwarzwald, and just want to note again how a change in grammar makes a difference or just simply keeps things the same. Murray writes: "After all, I don't see that a Christian theology of nature demands that we invoke God at the drop of the hat just because we run across some explanatory difficulty. Which is to acknowledge the point that the Christian theist can be quite responsible in the practice of science without even so much as paying lip service to naturalism by invoking MN as a practical maxim." One word change: "After all, I don't see that a Christian theology of SOCIETY demands that we invoke God at the drop of the hat just because we run across some explanatory difficulty. Which is to acknowledge the point that the Christian theist can be quite responsible in the practice of science without even so much as paying lip service to naturalism by invoking MN as a practical maxim." Yes, this makes a big, nay HUGE, difference in what 'science' means to people. Or does anyone deny that there is such a thing as a theology of society? How does science influence or affect my everyday life? If we are speaking of society, or culture or nation, the connection is much more direct for most 'non-scientists'. Finally, just now re-reading over my dissertation, which is in the final stages before defence, and the following sentence jumped out at me; I actually 'defined' (shock as it is to me now) the term 'naturalism' as follows: "Naturalism is the ideology that preferences NPS above HSS."   Anyone who would wish to challenge this, I'm open for discussing it (i.e. before defending it in front of a panel of professors in my not-first language)!  Cheers, Gregory ________________________________ From: David Clounch <david.clounch@gmail.com> To: "Alexanian, Moorad" <alexanian@uncw.edu> Cc: Murray Hogg <muzhogg@netspace.net.au>; ASA <asa@calvin.edu> Sent: Wed, November 4, 2009 1:11:26 PM Subject: Re: [asa] on science and meta-science Is it true or false that MN was invented to deal with a metaphysics?  And has that purpose and role. Thanks, Dave C On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 9:37 AM, Alexanian, Moorad <alexanian@uncw.edu> wrote: The laws of Nature are statistical in nature and so are based on generalizing the results of many experiments. Therefore, there is no way that miracles, for instance, can come in into the experimental results, which would be discarded if they differed greatly from the average results. > >As you say Murray, there really is no difference between attitudes in practicing scientists vis-à-vis their general worldviews. It is when we talk about the laws of Nature that one’s metaphysical notions will become evident. > >Whatever you do, drive a car, walk, breath, etc. is replete with assumptions that you make that are not brought forth except when the exceptional happens. Otherwise, one goes the merry old way without thinking much about metaphysical assumptions. Very much like fish in water, they are totally unaware of it and rightly so. > >Moorad >________________________________________ >From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On Behalf Of Murray Hogg [muzhogg@netspace.net.au] >Sent: Tuesday, November 03, 2009 10:03 AM >To: ASA > >Subject: Re: [asa] on science and meta-science > > >Hi Schwarzwald, > >Okay, so your fundamental point would be that if Christians were to enter into the lab and practice "methodological Christian theism" (MCT) then their descriptions of physical reality would be the same? > >Theologically speaking I think I could cope with this. After all, I don't see that a Christian theology of nature demands that we invoke God at the drop of the hat just because we run across some explanatory difficulty. Which is to acknowledge the point that the Christian theist can be quite responsible in the practice of science without even so much as paying lip service to naturalism by invoking MN as a practical maxim. > >Interesting... > >Blessings, >Murray > __________________________________________________________________ Make your browsing faster, safer, and easier with the new Internet Explorer® 8. Optimized for Yahoo! Get it Now for Free! at http://downloads.yahoo.com/ca/internetexplorer/

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Tue Nov 3 15:14:40 2009