Page 35 of 35 FirstFirst ... 25333435
Results 341 to 343 of 343

Thread: When does proving one's truth claims come to an end?

  1. #341
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    942
    Amen (Given)
    31
    Amen (Received)
    221
    Quote Originally Posted by Tassman View Post
    So, as a theist, you DON’T believe your deity has ultimate authority regarding morality and ethics.
    No, I don't. These things are not nearly as simple as you might assume.



    No, evolutionary theory. Our morality is merely the codification of our evolved social behavior to survive as cooperative social animals.
    Yes, that's the 'genetic fallacy' again. These things, again, are not nearly as simple as you might assume.



    A truism which applies to all areas of life.
    One wouldn't even know what a 'datum' is or a 'fact' after all, without already sophisticated powers of discrimination and an already rich conceptual web to fit them into.



    Science is adept at providing its own “necessary and sufficient conditions and foundations” without resorting to armchair metaphysicians like you
    Well, I'm not much of a metaphysician myself, but generally speaking you're absolutely wrong. You know nothing about the foundations of science. Science happens to be metaphysical through and through.



    You prefer a grey “schematic of the landscape” do you – one that leaves room for ambiguity?
    I think "humility" is the better term. The humility of an Einstein, for instance, and his reverence in the face of metaphysical conditions that make science possible.

    Naturalism is the accepted scientific paradigm and I have several times indicated that Methodological Naturalism is the most logical correlate of Metaphysical Naturalism.
    As I've stated numerous times, there is no logical entailment between them. Otherwise, no theist could be a practicing natural scientist. Those two things are perfectly compatible. So deciding on what is the "most logical correlate" would have to be decided on metaphysical ( non-empirical ) grounds.

  2. #342
    tWebber shunyadragon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Hillsborough, NC
    Faith
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    16,267
    Amen (Given)
    1857
    Amen (Received)
    1101
    Quote Originally Posted by Jim B. View Post
    They are decisive truths and they are not 'simply facts of the physical nature of our existence.'
    They are decisive facts that may be verified by scientific methods. You have nothing beyond that.

    Still waiting for a decisve truth. Simple physical facts are not decisive truths.

    Still waiting . . .
    Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
    Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
    But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeares Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

    go with the flow the river knows . . .

    Frank

    I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

  3. #343
    tWebber Tassman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Sydney/Phuket
    Faith
    Atheist
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    12,331
    Amen (Given)
    2645
    Amen (Received)
    1941
    Quote Originally Posted by shunyadragon View Post
    Disagree, Methodological Naturalism is grounded in the neutrality from philosophical beliefs such as Metaphysical Naturalism. Metaphysical Naturalism remains a philosophical worldview and not a scientific one.
    When I say that Methodological Naturalism is grounded in Metaphysical naturalism Im not saying that it is dependent upon it. But I think one can make the case that it fits comfortably within the framework of Metaphysical Naturalism in that, while not one of logical entailment, it is the only reasonable metaphysical conclusion given (1) the demonstrated success of methodological naturalism, combined with (2) the massive amount of knowledge gained by it, (3) the lack of a method or epistemology for knowing the supernatural, and (4) the subsequent lack of evidence for the supernatural. The above factors together provide solid grounding for philosophical naturalism, while supernaturalism remains little more than a logical possibility.

    https://infidels.org/library/modern/...aturalism.html
    He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it. - Douglas Adams.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •