Re: MN - limitation of science or limitation on reality?

Susan Brassfield (susan-brassfield@OU.EDU)
Tue, 15 Jun 1999 16:41:25 -0600

>>Susan said:
>>If you leave the question of the supernatural to one side (whether >you
>>believe in the supernatural or not) you can continue to enquire >about ANY
>>subject to your heart's content.

Jason Bode wrote:
>However this is not what I have heard before on this list. I've heard
>science should assume NO supernatural rather than leaving it to one side.

since quite a few scientists are also theists, the *must* leave the
supernatural aside rather than discarding it. Whether the assumption of the
existence of the supernatural is made or not, it has no relevance to the
study of nature.

>Do you think there can be measurable, observable evidence of supernatural
>origins?

no I don't--how would we recognize it?

>>when you watch something happen in front of your face, it tends to >be a
>>bit more compelling than when someone asks you to take on faith something
>>that can never be demonstrated.
>
>More compelling, but degree of attractivity of some tenet does not help in
>assigning a truth value to it. And to borrow from Chris, even though he
>wouldn't use it this way, how do you know something you're watching isn't an
>illusion?

you never do. That's why, in science, observations must be repeated by
different people under different conditions. Reality is always by
consensus. Some seemingly insane person in Timbuktu may be seeing reality
exactly for what it is, but it won't matter until the rest of us see it
that way too.

>>For a scientist none of it's true until supporting evidence can be found.
>
>Oh? Doesn't science usually take data and fit theories to it, then study
>further under the assumption the theories are true? Or try to prove theories
>wrong by assuming they're false?

if there is supporting evidence for something then it *might* be true. All
science is provisional. Theories only work if they have some basis in
reality--and consensus about reality. Evolution predicts that there will
be no fossil rabbits in the Cambrian layer. So far none have been found. If
one is, then evolution is in trouble. Strict Biblical creation predicts
that fossils of everything alive today will appear all at once in a recent
geological strata. That, of course, is *not* the case. Creation ex nihlo is
in trouble.

Susan

-----------

Life is short, but it's also very wide.

http://www.telepath.com/susanb/