Ray (originally) writes:
Evolution is based on materialism, which in essence says causation is perpetually material and never Divine. This is 101 stuff.
Your message contains my quote (above) but it fails to actually address what it says.
But let me address what you did end up writing:
Lithodid-Man writes:
In week one of my Philosophy of Science course I do an entire lecture on the difference between methodological materialism and philosophical materialism and how they are, often deliberately, confused by creationists. So here is a review of '101':
Methodological materialism is one of the most critical aspects of the scientific method. It is, simplistically, that when investigating a process or causation you begin with the assumption that those causes can be understood via natural laws or processes.
Philosophical materialism is a belief that only the natural exists, there can not be a supernatural.
We need to first define what "Materialism" means THEN explain and define the preceding qualifying terms ("methodological" and "philosophical").
Presently, what you have said, does not make sense. Here is why:
"Materialism" is a word that defines itself once somebody points that meaning out. The key is the simple noun "material." It means matter or physical substances, tangible things, inanimate and animate. "Materialism," as a term, describes the viewpoint that only matter exists and causation of everything is material in origin whether known or unknown. Materialism says God does not exist, that is why causation must be material - perpetually.
"Materialism": the belief that only matter exists.
Oxford English Dictionary, 2nd Edition
Concerning your distinctions: Methodological and Philosophical Materialism. The common denominator is the exclusion of God or supernatural to explain reality.
Your explanation of Philosophical Materialism, which says it is the belief that "only the natural exists" - is inaccurate. It simply indicates the belief that "only matter exists." Naturalism is the belief that "only the natural exists" and both terms are synonyms, and both terms presuppose the non-existence of God or Divine causation IN reality.
Your explanation of Methodological Materialism contains no discernible difference ***
in its effects*** from Philosophical Materialism. How would anyone know that any given scholar or scientist is practicing either alleged viewpoint? If God is excluded, which is the fact in both cases, then the qualifying of "Materialism" by the term "Methodological" amounts to a disclaimer that must actually be stated because the elucidation of data and evidence by a Methodological Materialist or Philosophical Materialist is indistinguishable?
Said disclaimer, in the case of Methodological Materialism is attempting to deny Atheism, which is, in effect, demanding audience to trust the assertion of denying Atheism, refuted by the fact of Divine exclusion (the common denominator) which corresponds to a pro-Atheist idea.
In essence you are attempting to say and insist that Methodological Materialism (also known as Methodological Naturalism) is agnostic or neutral concerning God and the supernatural. Since evolution says perpetual material and natural causation produced biological reality, and at no time did God intervene, this is a pro-Atheist doctrine: it says the God of Genesis did not produce biological reality; causation was always material and natural. Evolution, like I said, is Materialism or Naturalism (as defined above).
The first is a method and can say absolutely nothing about the existence or nonexistence of the supernatural, only that it cannot be used as a causal explanation. The latter is a belief, based on faith alone. All scientists use methodological materialism when conducting science, some scientists are ALSO philosophical materialists just as some are strongly religious.
How would anyone know when either is being practiced since there is no discernible difference?
Your comment says: "Trust us, despite the fact that God is ruled out by starting assumption, and at no time is He a possible explanation, this does not correspond to Atheism."
Brazen f**king lie insulting our intelligence.
The DI says that its brand of ID simply says that it can evidence reality to be the product of intelligence, yet evolutionists say they are including God. But evolutionists are hypocrites in their insistence that their "science" practices something called "Methdological Materialism" (= "says nothing about God" too). Since the overwhelming majority of Darwinian scientists are Atheists, evolution is Materialism. Since Methodological Materialism excludes God it says that God did not produce reality. Your denial, as seen in your explanation of Methodological Materialism, is bearing false witness.
So called "Christian" evolutionist scientists, their alleged Christianity, is refuted by the fact that they exclude God to explain evidence and reality. Christians include God, they do not exclude God.
An example I like to use is to have students imagine a police detective who is a fundamentalist Christian. He is investigating a murder scene. His investigation NEEDS to begin with the assumption that the murder occurred, that the murder was conducted by another human being, and that the murderer left some physical clues. He CANNOT investigate the murder assuming a supernatural agent was responsible, an evil spirit, demon, or even Old Scratch himself was responsible. His methodological materialist approach in no way speaks of his belief in the existence of the supernatural. He still believes in God, he still believes in Satan. He may even believe (and probably does) that ultimately the murder was caused by supernatural influences. But his investigation is entirely physical.
False analogy.
Our subject is the ORIGIN of living things, not a murder investigation which has no bearing on the true and CORRECT ORIGIN of living things, and the correct starting assumptions to investigate the origin of living things. Assuming that Genesis is wrong and that God is not involved in the production of living things - ever - is Materialism, the philosophy that evolution abides by.
Suppose I said: "Trust me, Methodological Creationism means only that we are neutral about evolution, it could be true, but since it excludes the Creator to explain the existence of species, it is non-scientific."
This is the world of all real scientists, whether atheist, Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist, etc. A Christian who is also an evolutionary biologist will look at a phenomena, examine evidence, and search for naturalistic explanations. Even if they believe that ultimately the phenomena is the result of supernatural agencies.
False.
It is the real world of evolutionists and their anti-God ideologies (Methdological and Philosophical Materialism) packaged as "science."
Science presupposes the existence of God. The appearance of design seen abundantly is nature and animals logically corresponds to the work of invisible Designer. Evolution, by assumption, denies this logic and says materialistic things produced the nature that we see. The assumption is self-evidently pro-Atheism. Once the assumption is made, God is never an option regardless of what the evidence (design seen in nature) says. Science belongs to the minority, its rightful and original owner. Facts produced by the majority (evolutionists) can only be legitimately explained and interpreted by Creationism-Design (the minority).
One point that needs to be stressed is that with methodological materialism supernatural agencies cannot be considered as science. But this is a two-way street. The statement "There is a god" and "There is no god" are equally unscientific although legitimate scientists may hold either belief.
This is an attempt to assert an objectivity that cannot possibly exist. Everyone has opinions about God and Lithodid-Man seeks to insult everyones intelligence by saying the anti-God opinions of evolutionists are not seen in their "science." Since both methodologies/philosophies exclude God by starting assumption, evolution is pro-Atheism. That is the objective bias of evolution.
Ask yourself, why would a Christian scientist abide by pro-Atheist assumptions? Again, if they do then this fact refutes their claim of being a Christian. They are either confused, deluded or like the New Testament explains persons who appear to be walking with Christ, but are not (like Judas the Betrayer), they are deceived by Satan. Yes, we have an explanation for "Christian" scientists who abide by evolution methodologies. Biblical typology corresponds to reality, which is the claim of the Bible: what it says corresponds to reality.
Ray
Edited by Cold Foreign Object, : No reason given.
™ Version 4.2