chapter 1.3 the greek naturalistic house continues construction…

Chapter 1.3Chapter 1.3

The Greek Naturalistic House The Greek Naturalistic House continues construction… continues construction…

With the foundation laid, the first floor With the foundation laid, the first floor pillars in place, resulting in a system of pillars in place, resulting in a system of thought called Greek Natural Philosophy, thought called Greek Natural Philosophy, then using the preferred method or then using the preferred method or methods to arrive at Reliable Knowledge, methods to arrive at Reliable Knowledge, we come to a practice of gathering, we come to a practice of gathering, studying, interpreting, and ordering the studying, interpreting, and ordering the information gathered from the world information gathered from the world around us… commonly known as around us… commonly known as practicing Science.practicing Science.

The Science produced by this structure of The Science produced by this structure of thought is called…thought is called…

E

mpi

ricis

m

Rat

iona

lism

Greek Natural Philosophy

The

N

atur

al

Wor

ld

is a

ll th

at

Exi

sts

The

C

osm

os

Con

sist

s on

ly o

f N

atur

al

Ele

men

ts

The

C

osm

os

Fun

ctio

ns

acco

rdin

g to

Nat

ural

P

roce

sses

The

S

uper

-N

atur

al

Doe

s N

ot

Exi

st

THE SUPERNATURAL DOES NOT EXIST

S

kept

icis

m

Evolutionary Science

Evolutionary ScienceEvolutionary Science

As mentioned before, science is the As mentioned before, science is the practice of gathering, studying, practice of gathering, studying, interpreting, and ordering the data interpreting, and ordering the data according to pre-established rules according to pre-established rules formulated by the underlying chosen formulated by the underlying chosen philosophy; Evolutionary Science is the philosophy; Evolutionary Science is the product of practicing science from a Greek product of practicing science from a Greek Natural Philosophy base of thinking.Natural Philosophy base of thinking.

From the Greeks to Darwin From the Greeks to Darwin By Henry Fairfield OsbornBy Henry Fairfield Osborn

1. Thales of Miletus (640 B.C.- 546 B.C.) He 1. Thales of Miletus (640 B.C.- 546 B.C.) He declared water to be the matter from which declared water to be the matter from which all else arose.all else arose.

2. Anaximander (611 B.C.- 547 B.C.) The 2. Anaximander (611 B.C.- 547 B.C.) The earth was first covered with water; from its earth was first covered with water; from its gradual drying up all creatures were gradual drying up all creatures were produced. Aquatic men first appeared in the produced. Aquatic men first appeared in the form of fish and they emerged from this form of fish and they emerged from this element only after they had progressed in element only after they had progressed in development to sustain themselves on land. development to sustain themselves on land. This was like a metamorphasis with the idea This was like a metamorphasis with the idea of survival through trying circumstances.of survival through trying circumstances.

From the Greeks to DarwinFrom the Greeks to Darwin By Henry Fairfield OsbornBy Henry Fairfield Osborn

3. Xenophanes (576 B.C.- 480 B.C.) 3. Xenophanes (576 B.C.- 480 B.C.) The ultimate origin of life he traced back The ultimate origin of life he traced back

to was Spontaneous Generation, believing to was Spontaneous Generation, believing that the sun warming the earth produced that the sun warming the earth produced plants and animals.plants and animals.

From the Greeks to DarwinFrom the Greeks to Darwin By Henry Fairfield OsbornBy Henry Fairfield Osborn

4. Empedocles (495 B.C.- 435 B.C.) He 4. Empedocles (495 B.C.- 435 B.C.) He believed the development of life was a believed the development of life was a gradual process. That plants evolved gradual process. That plants evolved before animals. That the imperfect forms before animals. That the imperfect forms were gradually replaced by perfect forms. were gradually replaced by perfect forms. The natural cause of the production of The natural cause of the production of perfect forms was the extinction of the perfect forms was the extinction of the imperfect.imperfect.

From the Greeks to Darwin From the Greeks to Darwin By Henry Fairfield OsbornBy Henry Fairfield Osborn

5. Plato (428 B.C.- 348 B.C.) His Chain of 5. Plato (428 B.C.- 348 B.C.) His Chain of Being, was from the perfect to the Being, was from the perfect to the imperfect. It was a degenerative evolution. imperfect. It was a degenerative evolution.

6. Aristotle (384 B.C. – 322 B.C.) He 6. Aristotle (384 B.C. – 322 B.C.) He believed in a complete ascending believed in a complete ascending gradation in nature, a progressive gradation in nature, a progressive development corresponding with the development corresponding with the progressive life of the soul. His concept progressive life of the soul. His concept was of a single chain of being evolving was of a single chain of being evolving from polyps to man.from polyps to man.

In the late 1800’s the three separate In the late 1800’s the three separate methods of Empiricism, Rationalism, and methods of Empiricism, Rationalism, and Skepticism joined together to form a new Skepticism joined together to form a new three step method of attaining Reliable three step method of attaining Reliable Knowledge:Knowledge:

Step #1… Experiment = EmpiricismStep #1… Experiment = Empiricism

Step #2… Hypothesis = RationalismStep #2… Hypothesis = Rationalism

Step #3… Repeat Experiment = SkepticismStep #3… Repeat Experiment = Skepticism

This three step method is now known as This three step method is now known as the “Scientific Method” followed for the “Scientific Method” followed for attaining Reliable Knowledge.attaining Reliable Knowledge.

But does Modern Science Really Have Such Rules?But does Modern Science Really Have Such Rules?

Judge Jones; Kitzmiller case # 4:04-cv-2688-JEJ, page 65Judge Jones; Kitzmiller case # 4:04-cv-2688-JEJ, page 65December 20, 2005December 20, 2005

While supernatural explanations may be While supernatural explanations may be important and have merit , they are not a part important and have merit , they are not a part of science. This self-imposed convention of of science. This self-imposed convention of science, which limits inquiry to testable, natural science, which limits inquiry to testable, natural explanations about the natural world, is explanations about the natural world, is referred to by philosophers as “methodological referred to by philosophers as “methodological naturalism” and is sometimes known as the naturalism” and is sometimes known as the scientific method. Methodological naturalism is scientific method. Methodological naturalism is a “ground rule” of science today which requires a “ground rule” of science today which requires scientists to seek explanations in the world scientists to seek explanations in the world around us based upon what we can observe, around us based upon what we can observe, test, replicate, and verify.test, replicate, and verify.

Terms:Terms: Methodological NaturalismMethodological Naturalism: Means that a : Means that a

person in public practice applies methods that person in public practice applies methods that assume that all can be explained by natural assume that all can be explained by natural processes. This leaves the door open to the processes. This leaves the door open to the supernatural in private practice.supernatural in private practice.

Metaphysical NaturalismMetaphysical Naturalism: Means that a person : Means that a person

applies Natural Philosophy to both his/her applies Natural Philosophy to both his/her public and private practices.public and private practices.

Magazine: National GeographicMagazine: National GeographicFebruary of 2007, Voices; page 33February of 2007, Voices; page 33

Francis Collins; The Scientist as Francis Collins; The Scientist as BelieverBeliever

By John HorganBy John Horgan

Horgan: As a scientist who looks for Horgan: As a scientist who looks for natural explanations of things and natural explanations of things and demands evidence, how can you also demands evidence, how can you also believe in miracles, like the resurrection?believe in miracles, like the resurrection?


Francis Collins; The Scientist as BelieverFrancis Collins; The Scientist as BelieverBy John HorganBy John Horgan

Collins: I don’t have a problem with the Collins: I don’t have a problem with the concept that miracles might occasionally concept that miracles might occasionally occur at moments of great significance, occur at moments of great significance, where there is a message being transmitted where there is a message being transmitted to us by God Almighty. But as a scientist I set to us by God Almighty. But as a scientist I set my standards for miracles very high.my standards for miracles very high.


Francis Collins; The Scientist as BelieverFrancis Collins; The Scientist as BelieverBy John HorganBy John Horgan

Horgan: The problem I have with miracles Horgan: The problem I have with miracles is not just that they violate what science is not just that they violate what science tells us about how the world works. They tells us about how the world works. They also make God seem too capricious. For also make God seem too capricious. For example, many people believe that if they example, many people believe that if they pray hard enough God will intercede to pray hard enough God will intercede to heal them or a loved one. But does that heal them or a loved one. But does that mean that all those who don’t get better mean that all those who don’t get better aren’t worthy?aren’t worthy?

Book: Scientists Confront CreationismBook: Scientists Confront CreationismIntroduction by Richard Lewontin, page XIVIntroduction by Richard Lewontin, page XIV

“We cannot live simultaneously in a world of natural causation and of miracles, if one can occur, there is no limit.”

Paper: Naturalism Is Today- By History, Philosophy, And Paper: Naturalism Is Today- By History, Philosophy, And Purpose- An Essential Part of SciencePurpose- An Essential Part of Science

By Dr. Steven d. SchafersmanBy Dr. Steven d. Schafersman

“Do theistic scientists think they are playing a game, in which they do science during the day with naturalistic methods, but at night go home and leave naturalism behind in the laboratory, since they don’t really believe it describes a true picture of reality?”

Magazine: Time; November 13, 2006Magazine: Time; November 13, 2006God vs. Science, God vs. Science, By David Van Biema page 51By David Van Biema page 51

Time: Professor Dawkins, if one truly understands science, is God then a delusion, as your book title suggests (The God Delusion)?

Dawkins: The question of whether there exists a Super Natural Creator, a God, is one of the most important that we have to answer. I think it is a scientific question. My answer is no.


Time: Dr. Collins, the Resurrection is an essential argument of Christian faith, but doesn’t it, along with the virgin birth and lesser miracles, fatally undermine the scientific method, which depends on the constancy of natural laws?

Collins: If you are willing to answer yes to a God outside of nature, then there’s nothing inconsistent with God on rare occasions choosing to invade the natural world in a way that appears miraculous.


Time: Doesn’t the very notion of miracles throw off science?

Collins: Not at all. …

Dawkins: If ever there was a slamming of the door in the face of constructive investigation, it is the word miracle. … Once you buy into the position of faith, then suddenly you find yourself losing all of your natural skepticism and your scientific- really scientific- credibility. I’m sorry to be so blunt.

E

mpi

ricis

m

Rat

iona

lism


The

N

atur

al

Wor

ld

is a

ll th

at

Exi

sts

The

C

osm

os

Con

sist

s on

ly o

f N

atur

al

Ele

men

ts

The

C

osm

os

Fun

ctio

ns

acco

rdin

g to

Nat

ural

P

roce

sses

The

S

uper

-N

atur

al

Doe

s N

ot

Exi

st


S

kept

icis

m


Nat

ural

Mat

ter

+

Ene

rgy

In any pattern of thought there must In any pattern of thought there must be something eternal.be something eternal.

Since this house is limited to the Since this house is limited to the Natural world, Then Matter and Natural world, Then Matter and Energy must be eternal, they cannot Energy must be eternal, they cannot be created.be created.

Em

pir

icis

m

Rat

ion

alis

m Greek Natural Philosophy

Th

e N

atu

ral

Wo

rld

is

all

th

at

Exi

sts

Th

e C

osm

os

Co

nsi

sts

on

ly o

f N

atu

ral

Ele

men

ts

Th

e C

osm

os

Fu

nct

ion

s ac

cord

ing

to

Nat

ura

l P

roce

sse

s

Th

e S

up

er-

Nat

ura

l D

oes

N

ot

Exi

st


S

kep

tici

sm


Nat

ura

l

Mat

ter

+

En

erg

y

Nat

ura

l

Tim

e +

C

han

ce

Since Matter and Energy are Eternal, Since Matter and Energy are Eternal, that means that Time has always that means that Time has always been.been.

The Four components that The Four components that Evolutionary Science has to Explain Evolutionary Science has to Explain Origins by:Origins by:

Matter + Energy + Time + Chance Matter + Energy + Time + Chance

Origins According To This Model:Origins According To This Model:

1. Origin of The Universe.1. Origin of The Universe. Matter + Energy + Time + Chance = Matter + Energy + Time + Chance = “ “The Big Bang”The Big Bang”

2. Origin of Life.2. Origin of Life. Matter (Water) + Energy (Sun) + Time + Matter (Water) + Energy (Sun) + Time + Chance =The Spontaneous Origin of LifeChance =The Spontaneous Origin of Life

3. Origin of Man3. Origin of Man Matter (Monkey) + Energy (Mutations) + Matter (Monkey) + Energy (Mutations) + Time + Chance = ManTime + Chance = Man

E

mpi

ricis

m

Rat

iona

lism


The

N

atur

al

Wor

ld

is a

ll th

at

Exi

sts

The

C

osm

os

Con

sist

s on

ly o

f N

atur

al

Ele

men

ts

The

C

osm

os

Fun

ctio

ns

acco

rdin

g to

Nat

ural

P

roce

sses

The

S

uper

-N

atur

al

Doe

s N

ot

Exi

st


S

kept

icis

m


Nat

ural

Mat

ter

+

Ene

rgy

Nat

ural

Tim

e +

C

hanc

e

MAN

Man,Man, believing that he is a product of:believing that he is a product of:

Matter + Energy + Time + ChanceMatter + Energy + Time + Chance

arrives at the conclusion that…arrives at the conclusion that…

“ “The Super Natural Does Not Exist”The Super Natural Does Not Exist”


Dawkins: The question of whether there exists a Super Natural Creator, a God, is one of the most important that we have to answer. I think it is a scientific question. My answer is no.

E

mpi

ricis

m

Rat

iona

lism


The

N

atur

al

Wor

ld

is a

ll th

at

Exi

sts

The

C

osm

os

Con

sist

s on

ly o

f N

atur

al

Ele

men

ts

The

C

osm

os

Fun

ctio

ns

acco

rdin

g to

Nat

ural

P

roce

sses

The

S

uper

-N

atur

al

Doe

s N

ot

Exi

st


S

kept

icis

m


Nat

ural

Mat

ter

+

Ene

rgy

Nat

ural

Tim

e +

C

hanc

e

MAN

The Super-Natural Does Not Exist

To employ a Science that is based on To employ a Science that is based on the belief that God does not exist, to the belief that God does not exist, to then prove by that same Science that then prove by that same Science that God does not exist…God does not exist…

That is called “Circular Reasoning”That is called “Circular Reasoning”

E

mpi

ricis

m

Rat

iona

lism


The

N

atur

al

Wor

ld

is a

ll th

at

Exi

sts

The

C

osm

os

Con

sist

s on

ly o

f N

atur

al

Ele

men

ts

The

C

osm

os

Fun

ctio

ns

acco

rdin

g to

Nat

ural

P

roce

sses

The

S

uper

-N

atur

al

Doe

s N

ot

Exi

st


S

kept

icis

m


Nat

ural

Mat

ter

+

Ene

rgy

Nat

ural

Tim

e +

C

hanc

e

MAN

The Super-Natural Does Not Exist

chapter 1.3 the greek naturalistic house continues construction…

Documents

natural world

product of practicing

natural processes

natural elements

construction slide

system of thought

structure of thought

greek naturalistic house