Scientists have argued .for independent higher level laws.
You have tried to argue that supernaturalism fails to answer any question by extrapolation from one example, where naturalism does well. The supernaturalist could likewise cherry-pick examples.
Scientists have argued .for independent higher level laws.
You have tried to argue that supernaturalism fails to answer any question by extrapolation from one example, where naturalism does well. The supernaturalist could likewise cherry-pick examples.
Examples where supernaturalism is methodologically successful? I would love to hear some!
(Not being sarcastic here; I really would.)
Consciousness, value,meaning....
Basically anything that regularly gets dismissed as a non question...
Hmm, I don’t know that we mean the same thing by “methodological.”
When has someone succeeded in producing any effect or predicting any event, specifically by invoking supernatural knowledge?
To which the supernaturalism replies: when did natural knowledge tell you what the meaning and purpose of your life is? Same problem as before, IOW.
I don’t know how I got into this. I only claimed that naturalist and reductionism don’t answer all questions. That doesn’t mean something else does.