Why is naturalism considered scientific and creationism is not ?

[Youwerecreated]

How, then, is creationism—as opposed to “naturalism,” defined as “a philosophical viewpoint according to which everything arises from natural properties and causes, and supernatural or spiritual explanations are excluded or discounted”—scientific? Admittedly, the answer depends on how you define “scientific.” Too often, “science” and “naturalism” are considered one and the same, leaving creationist views out by definition. Such a definition requires an irrational reverence of naturalism. Science is defined as “the observation, identification, description, experimental investigation, and theoretical explanation of phenomena.” Nothing requires science, in and of itself, to be naturalistic. Naturalism, like creationism, requires a series of presuppositions that are not generated by experiments. They are not extrapolated from data or derived from test results. These philosophical presuppositions are accepted before any data is ever taken. Because both naturalism and creationism are strongly influenced by presuppositions that are neither provable nor testable, and enter into the discussion well before the facts do, it is fair to say that creationism is at least as scientific as naturalism.

Is creationism scientific?

 

[Youwerecreated]

Now you can understand why so many believe in design and creation over naturalism.

 

[Hollie]

Now you can understand why so many believe in design and creation over naturalism.

Why is naturalism considered scientific and creationism is not ? For the same reasons naturalism is considered scientific and voodoo is not.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Now you can understand why so many believe in design and creation over naturalism.

Why is naturalism considered scientific and creationism is not ? For the same reasons naturalism is considered scientific and voodoo is not.

You are once again wrong.


Evolution, Creationism, Intelligent Design | Gallup Historical Trends

 

[Youwerecreated]

Another one.

More Than 9 in 10 Americans Continue to Believe in God

 

[Youwerecreated]

It seems that atheistic naturalists theories are failing.

 

[Hollie]

It seems that atheistic naturalists theories are failing.

Your silly conspiracies are failing.

 

[Youwerecreated]

It seems that atheistic naturalists theories are failing.

Your silly conspiracies are failing.

Oh know God is alive and well according to a large majority of the population.

 

[Youwerecreated]

It seems that atheistic naturalists theories are failing.

Your silly conspiracies are failing.

It is you that promotes conspiracies.

 

[Derideo_Te]

It seems that atheistic naturalists theories are failing.

Your silly conspiracies are failing.

Oh know God is alive and well according to a large majority of the population.

63% of Republicans still believe that Iraq had WMD's in 2003.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Your silly conspiracies are failing.

Oh know God is alive and well according to a large majority of the population.

63% of Republicans still believe that Iraq had WMD's in 2003.

Did you not see that poll that a very high number of Democrats believe in God and creation.

What this has to do with this discussion is beyond me.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Oh know God is alive and well according to a large majority of the population.

63% of Republicans still believe that Iraq had WMD's in 2003.

Did you not see that poll that a very high number of Democrats believe in God and creation.

What this has to do with this discussion is beyond me.

What is beyond you is understanding statistics. There is an old saying that there are lies, damn lies and statistics. Just as there is no correlation between what a majority of Republicans still believe about WMD's and reality there is no correlation between your poll results and the existence of your deity either. That you are gullible enough to believe that there is says volumes. Have a nice day.

 

[Youwerecreated]

63% of Republicans still believe that Iraq had WMD's in 2003.

Did you not see that poll that a very high number of Democrats believe in God and creation.

What this has to do with this discussion is beyond me.

What is beyond you is understanding statistics. There is an old saying that there are lies, damn lies and statistics. Just as there is no correlation between what a majority of Republicans still believe about WMD's and reality there is no correlation between your poll results and the existence of your deity either. That you are gullible enough to believe that there is says volumes. Have a nice day.

Gullible many are but I would say the most gullible would be the ones believing life came from non-life lol.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Did you not see that poll that a very high number of Democrats believe in God and creation.

What this has to do with this discussion is beyond me.

What is beyond you is understanding statistics. There is an old saying that there are lies, damn lies and statistics. Just as there is no correlation between what a majority of Republicans still believe about WMD's and reality there is no correlation between your poll results and the existence of your deity either. That you are gullible enough to believe that there is says volumes. Have a nice day.

Gullible many are but I would say the most gullible would be the ones believing life came from non-life lol.

While the final answer is still to be found and no, you don't have it, the scientific process is moving ever closer to the point where that is going to be discovered. Already the origins of the building blocks of life are known. The rest is just a matter of time and effort. All of the current evidence points towards a natural origin.

 

[YWN666]

I don't know anything about this "naturalism" but I do know that creationism is a bunch of nonsensical bunk and it cannot qualify as a scientific theory. I can't believe that anyone still believes in that crap after the major embarrassment to both creationism and ID in the Dover, Pa courtroom.

 

[daws101]

it appears ywc is off his meds again...

 

[Youwerecreated]

What is beyond you is understanding statistics. There is an old saying that there are lies, damn lies and statistics. Just as there is no correlation between what a majority of Republicans still believe about WMD's and reality there is no correlation between your poll results and the existence of your deity either. That you are gullible enough to believe that there is says volumes. Have a nice day.

Gullible many are but I would say the most gullible would be the ones believing life came from non-life lol.

While the final answer is still to be found and no, you don't have it, the scientific process is moving ever closer to the point where that is going to be discovered. Already the origins of the building blocks of life are known. The rest is just a matter of time and effort. All of the current evidence points towards a natural origin.

They do know the building blocks of life but they will never be able to demonstrate origins in a naturalistic setting. Even if they find a way for life to be formed through these building blocks it was accomplished through intelligence not naturalism.

 

[Youwerecreated]

I don't know anything about this "naturalism" but I do know that creationism is a bunch of nonsensical bunk and it cannot qualify as a scientific theory. I can't believe that anyone still believes in that crap after the major embarrassment to both creationism and ID in the Dover, Pa courtroom.

Both naturalism and creationism is merely philosophy and the full tenets of both can't be tested through the scientific method.

The day is coming when the courts will be fully educated to make an adequate decision concerning both views.

 

[daws101]

Gullible many are but I would say the most gullible would be the ones believing life came from non-life lol.

While the final answer is still to be found and no, you don't have it, the scientific process is moving ever closer to the point where that is going to be discovered. Already the origins of the building blocks of life are known. The rest is just a matter of time and effort. All of the current evidence points towards a natural origin.

They do know the building blocks of life but they will never be able to demonstrate origins in a naturalistic setting. Even if they find a way for life to be formed through these building blocks it was accomplished through intelligence not naturalism.

way to rationalize !
thing is IT WON'T BE THE KIND OF intelligent you're wishing for..

 

[Derideo_Te]

I don't know anything about this "naturalism" but I do know that creationism is a bunch of nonsensical bunk and it cannot qualify as a scientific theory. I can't believe that anyone still believes in that crap after the major embarrassment to both creationism and ID in the Dover, Pa courtroom.

Both naturalism and creationism is merely philosophy and the full tenets of both can't be tested through the scientific method.

The day is coming when the courts will be fully educated to make an adequate decision concerning both views.

Your ignorance is boundless.

Naturalism (philosophy) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Naturalism is "the idea or belief that only natural (as opposed to supernatural or spiritual) laws and forces operate in the world; (occas.) the idea or belief that nothing exists beyond the natural world."[1] Adherents of naturalism (i.e. naturalists) assert that natural laws are the rules that govern the structure and behavior of the natural universe, that the universe is a product of these laws.[2]
"Naturalism can intuitively be separated into a [metaphysical] and a methodological component."[3] Metaphysical here refers to the philosophical study of the nature of reality. Philosopher Paul Kurtz argues that nature is best accounted for by reference to material principles. These principles include mass, energy, and other physical and chemical properties accepted by the scientific community. Further, this sense of naturalism holds that spirits, deities, and ghosts are not real and that there is no "purpose" in nature. Such an absolute belief in naturalism is commonly referred to as metaphysical naturalism.[4]