Re: The naturalist Philosophy

From: Keith B Miller (
Date: Sat Aug 31 2002 - 12:34:02 EDT

  • Next message: "Re: The naturalist Philosophy"

    >So, has anybody tried fighting to get a little
    >philosophy of science into school board curricula?
    >Why not?

    The central core of the disputes over science education here in Kansas and
    elsewhere have to do with understandings of the nature of science. The
    earlier standards fight here is Kansas was largely focused on definitions
    of science, the same is true in Ohio. A solid understanding of the
    philosophy and methodologies of science is vital. I think that a
    rudimentary introduction to the historical and philosophical issues of
    science can be incorporated into secondary science curricula. Just
    presenting scientific concepts in their appropriate histrical context can
    help greatly.

    The problem with the proposals being made by ID advocates and others is
    that they serve to break down the limitations and boundaries of science as
    a way of knowing. "Methodological naturalism" is one term that is used to
    express the empirical nature of science and its restriction to explaining
    observations by appeal to "natural" processes and forces. By seeking to
    break down those boundaries, science is made to be synonomous with
    "knowledge" or "logic." This not only destroys the distinction between
    science and other ways of knowing, but also between science and

    Science simply is not the only path to truth. Ironically, some ID
    proponents want to make theological claims subject to scientific
    verification and thus elevate science to the final arbitor of truth.


    Keith B. Miller
    Department of Geology
    Kansas State University
    Manhattan, KS 66506

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Aug 31 2002 - 13:38:47 EDT