Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: Alamo-Girl

While the present day definition of science excludes the supernatural, (or extra-natural, if you will) thereby rendering the person speaking as a scientist unqualified to speak on those subjects, the theists who believe in both the natural and supernatural are qualified to speak on both as they have not excluded the natural from their field of study.


446 posted on 01/05/2009 12:44:23 PM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 432 | View Replies ]


To: metmom; betty boop
While the present day definition of science excludes the supernatural, (or extra-natural, if you will) thereby rendering the person speaking as a scientist unqualified to speak on those subjects, the theists who believe in both the natural and supernatural are qualified to speak on both as they have not excluded the natural from their field of study.

Very true, however, when they speak of the supernatural under the color of science - e.g. in a scientific journal, book - they are apt to be expelled.

Which led Tipler to ask Refereed Journals: Do They Insure Quality or Enforce Orthodoxy?

A quick Google on the response to both of the above linked items shows how toxic the atmosphere has become in America for "freedom of inquiry" in the sciences as Ben Stein called it.

Seems to me that all conservatives would agree that freedom of inquiry, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly and freedom of religion are crucial to our way of life.

453 posted on 01/05/2009 1:00:07 PM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 446 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


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