Document Type : Research Paper
Author
Assistant Professor, Isfahan Univesity, Isfahan, Iran
Abstract
Scientific naturalism is a doctrine that consists of two ontological and methodological components. On the basis of the methodological component, the scientific method is the only source for validation (about nature), and based on the ontological component, all that exists (causation) can be investigated by science. Some naturalist philosophers believe that the ontological component, that is, ontological (or metaphysical) natureism, is an essential or structural philosophy for science, in the sense that if science is eliminated from metaphysics, then what is obtained will no longer be science.
In contrast, many naturalist critics believe that ontological naturalism is a lesson outside metaphysics of science, and only methodological naturalism (not a metaphysical principle) is a disciplining or methodological principle for science. In this sense, naturalism is used only as a pragmatic predicate for scientific action of scientists. In this paper, we will show that none of the two approaches are correct in relation to the relation between naturalism and science; and we are not allowed to block the flow of Hwites and supernatural causes into the realm of science, based on a metaphysical or pragmatic default, and the metaphysics of the universe We presuppose nature to science, which is free from such an echo and causation from the beginning.
Keywords
- تالیافرو، چارلز (1382). فلسفه دین در قرن بیستم، ترجمه انشاءالله رحمتی، دفتر پژوهش و نشر سهروردی، تهران
- Clarke, Steven (2009). "Naturalism, Science and the Supernatural", SOPHIA, 48: 127-142
- Dawkins, Richard (1996). The Blind Whatchmaker: Why Evidence of Evolution Reveals a Universe without Design, New York, Norton
- Fishman, Y. I. (2009). "Can Science test Supernatural Worldview?", Science & Education, 18: 813-837
- Flew, Antony (1972). "The Presumption of Atheism", Canadian Journal of Philosophy, 2: 29-46
- Johnson, P. (1995). Reasons in the Balance: The Case Against Naturalism in Science, Law, and Education, Downers Grove
- Gasser Georg and Matthias Stefan (2007). "The Heavy Burden of Proof for Ontological Naturalism", in How Successful Naturalism?ed. by Georg Gasser, Ontos-Verlag: 159-181.
- Mahner, Martin (2012). "The Role of Metaphysical Naturalism in Science", Science & Education, V. 21, Issue 10: 1437-1459
- McMullin, Ernan (2011). "Varieties of Methodological Naturalism", in The Nature of Nature, ed. by Bruce L. Gordon an William A Dembski, ISI Books: 82-94
- Monton, B (2009). Seeking God in Science: An Atheist Defends Intelligent Design
- Moser, Paul K. and Yandell David (2000). "Farewell to Philosophical Naturalism", in Naturalism: A Critical Analysis, ed. by W. L. Craig, London, Routledge: 3-23.
- Numbers, Ronald L. (2011). "Science without God: Natural Laws and Christian Beliefs", In Bruce L. Gordon and William A Dembski (Eds), The Nature of Nature, USA, ISI Books: 62-81
- Plantinga, Alvin (2011). Where the Conflict Really Lies: Science, Religion and Naturalism, New York, Oxford University Press
- Rea, Michael (2002). World without Design: The Ontological Consequences of Naturalism, New York, Oxford
- Scott, Eugenie (1993). "Darwin Prosecuted: Review of Johnson's Darwin on Trial", Creation/Evolution Journal, V. 13 N. 2: 36-47.
- Shalkowski, S. (1992). "Atheological Apologetics", in Contemporary Perspectives in Religious Epistemology, ed. By R. Geivett and B. Sweetman, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
- Young, M. &Perakh, M. (2004). "Is Intelligent Design Science?" In M. Young & T. Edis (Eds.), Why Intelligent Design Fails
)