Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: RobbyS
"The problem arose with Thomas Huxley and other Darwinist propogandists, who insisted on a doctrinate anti-supernaturalism. They were far more interested in natural selection as a philosophical concept than as a scientific tool."

Huxley was at best lukewarm about natural selection. Natural selection didn't become a central part in most evolutionist's paradigm until the 1930's and 40's.

Anti-supernaturalism in has been a staple of science since Galileo and Newton.
287 posted on 09/30/2005 8:50:29 PM PDT by CarolinaGuitarman ("There is a grandeur in this view of life...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 281 | View Replies ]


To: CarolinaGuitarman

. What I mean by anti-supernaturalism is partly the reaction to the gnosticism of many clerical scientists, the amateurs who dominated the profession before 1860. But it is also an anti-religious attitude which neither Galileo nor Newton subscribed to. Aristotle was as much a naturalist as Darwin. In fact his philosophy was greatly influenced by his biology knowledge and was, in many respects, as naturalistic as Darwin's or Dawkins," for that matter. But Christian theology managed to create a synthesis --an uneasy synthesis--with Aristotle's science and philosophy, which many 19th century scientists refused to attempt. Marx, Darwin and Freud were all personally hostile to religion, with Darwin more or less masking his because of the piety of his wife.


302 posted on 09/30/2005 9:54:03 PM PDT by RobbyS ( CHIRHO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 287 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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