'methodological naturalism'

If the data points to outcomes that natural causes can’t explain, then ruling out supernatural causes is not scientific humility — it’s religious dogma.

Jonah Goldberg talked with Harvard astronomer Avi Loeb about “Oumuamua, Alien Life & Fighting the Mainstream Science Community.”

It is well established that people of color are poorly represented in STEM fields compared with their representation in the larger population.

The rule, as he explains, is arbitrary. True, the designing agent inferred by ID theory is not directly observable, but neither are the elementary particles.

Dawes and Smith say they’re simply describing (as a “matter of fact”) the history of science.

A corespondent draws our attention to a comment from atheist and “poetic naturalist” Sean Carroll, in his recent book.

In a previous post, I argued that methodological naturalism is a reasonable and neutral working principle limiting everyday science to natural causes.

O’Connor and Bishop offer no evolutionary mechanism as an explanation for the origin of the information necessary to produce novel forms of life.

After reading my article about MN, a correspondent wrote and asked a good question.

The only real motivation for holding to MN is to keep the bad guys at bay, as an all-purpose "Press Button in Case of Emergency" defeater for ideas like intelligent design.

Imagine a boy who tells a girl he could climb to Jupiter because a natural ladder stretches from our planet to it.