Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

To: BMCDA
As well as the atheistic version of physics, chemistry, geology... So in your opinion what is not religion based? Is there a version of the origins of the universe that is neither atheistic nor theistic from your point of view?

No scientific field is free from religious presupposition. Naturalism permeates all of them (geologic column is naturalistic in its assumptions; evolutionary biology assumes spontaneous generation and a professor at the secular university I attended even wrote in the school paper that Miller's experiment proved life could spontaneously generate - a lie; naturalistic physcisists teach that the universe suddenly sprang into existence from nothing; we have JW Gould, now a theist, who said that people were no more significant in this cosmos than a "dried twig" - no religious assumption there!).

On the other side, in chemistry, we have W. Dembski and ID theory which is theistic in its assumptions, etc. I can cite examples till I'm blue in the face. How many will convince you? In short, yes, no field is exempt from religious presupposition. They ALL have the underlying belief about God's existence.

4,183 posted on 01/09/2003 11:45:28 AM PST by exmarine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4174 | View Replies ]


To: exmarine
Now if everything is religion-based then we can't teach anything. Is it that what you are saying?

However, modern science is based on methodological naturalism (once again: methodological not metaphysical) because it works. You can see this when people with different religious backgrounds arrive at the same results.

4,187 posted on 01/09/2003 12:03:25 PM PST by BMCDA (Insert random Mencken quote here:__________)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4183 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson