Re: [asa] Expelled and ID

From: D. F. Siemens, Jr. <dfsiemensjr@juno.com>
Date: Fri Apr 25 2008 - 14:19:55 EDT

Note Thorson's response to Poe in the March PSCF. Notions exist before
they are labeled, or relabeled with new names. I recall one of my
colleagues in sociology lamenting that some sociologists spent their time
writing papers that renamed notions in the hope that somebody would use
their new label and give them momentary fame.
Dave (ASA)

On Fri, 25 Apr 2008 01:32:04 -0500 "David Clounch"
<david.clounch@gmail.com> writes:
Dave,

It would be very interesting for us to discover whether methodological
naturalism was invented in the twentieth century, or whether it has roots
further back in history and was merely borrowed. I could be wrong in
claiming it to have been invented by (De Vries?) at Wheaton. It's just
that I haven't gotten around to discovering any earlier source. As I
remember it, Poe claimed the De Vries paper was the very first
published anywhere.

Other forms of naturalism were obviously re-emergent in enlightenment
and post-enlightenment times. I believe Barr and D'Souza both argue
that naturalism itself is a Christian idea of ancient derivation.
Christians thought a rational approach to the universe combined with a
God that is outside the universe implied that the world runs in a regular
order. Thus paganism and animism were to be rejected, partly because
they depended on supernatural forces within nature. Naturalism
speaks against that.

Regards,
Dave

On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 3:13 PM, D. F. Siemens, Jr.
<dfsiemensjr@juno.com> wrote:

You're repeating the lie that is foundational in Johnson and ID.
Metaphysical naturalism, scientism, materialism and their ilk have
ancient roots, although some gained popularity again with the
Enlightenment. There is no way that I can be a theist and a metaphysical
naturalist. But there are many theists who are methodological
naturalists--they have to be both to be scientists.
Dave (ASA)

On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 08:56:19 -0400 "David Opderbeck"
<dopderbeck@gmail.com> writes:
<snip>
Dave Clounch asks: A third question is, "Should school children be
informed of the theological roots of naturalism?"

I respond: Not sure what you mean by the "theological roots of
naturalism" here -- but if you mean that methodolgical naturalism derives
from metaphysical naturalism, if that were accurate, you could probably
discuss this in a history class.

As your questions illustrate, it is extremely difficult in the public
education setting to discuss any issues about religion and science, even
at the level of basic presuppositions.

<snip>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Fri Apr 25 14:35:14 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Apr 25 2008 - 14:35:14 EDT