Over at EvolutionBlog, Jason takes up the issue of whether science has anything to say about the supernatural. An excerpt:
There is a seemingly endless stream of books explaining how to reconcile evolution with Christianity. There would be no reason to write such books if the separation between the natural and the supernatural were as clean as some would like to maintain. The rather large number of people in this country who see a threat to their religious faith from science are not being irrational. They do not need lectures from pompous academics about how they are all mixed up about what their faith requires of them. What they need are good arguments for why they are wrong about the implications of evolution, and they are certainly not getting them from he philosophers and theologians.
The concept “supernatural” is completely incoherent in my opinion. If you can observe something, it is as natural as anything else. Human fired projectiles and mechanisms like Paley’s watch obey “natural laws”. If there were such a thing as a god, whatever it did would be as “natural” as any other intelligently instigated phenomenon.
And when people define “supernatural” as something that science can’t touch is even worse. If science can’t observe it, neither can you bub. And if you can observe it, why then you become the scientist. So, any god we can know exists must be amenable to observation and therefore science.
Exactly! What’s the observable difference between supernatural and nonexistent?
In principal I agree 100% w/ Jerry’s observation. But it gets more than a little fuzzy for me when JC offers his last sentence: “What they need are good arguments for why they are wrong about the implications of evolution, and they are certainly not getting them from he philosophers and theologians.”
The hard fact being ignored here is that facts and logical, reality-based arguments do not work very well in the learning process of the people who argue otherwise, ie. peddle supernatural tripe. These people are a very special breed whose principal motivating force in life is fear driven by ignorance. They are impervious to logic, evidence and unwilling to accept as fact anything that they perceive as a violation of their scripture.
Yes, you may be able to convince these dolts that the earth is probably older than 10K years. But as soon as you manage to pop this absudity from a corner of one pf their brain cells, anyother stupidity rushes in immediately to take it’s place.
No, fact, logic or appeals to empirical evidence are not likely to have any appreciable effect at all. I think everyone would do themselves an enormous favor to visit the website for Cedarville “University” (www.cedarville.edu)some time and check out the profiles of their so-called “professors.” Some of these guys have PhDs!
No, I believe that there is only one thing we can do to rid ourselves of this class of idiot from 21st century influence – continue to oppose and riddicule them until they’re rendered into living cartoons.
~Rev. El
It may be true that these people are beyond learning rationality, but who cares? It’s more to the point to discredit them so that others (who can learn) don’t follow them. All people who are ignorant on a subject, tend to look to authorities for guidance. We just need to make it clear that these people touting supernatural woo on subject X are not authorities on that subject and have no credentials to claim such.
I totally agree with Rev El Mundo that the superstitious are not amenable to “fact-based” evidence. They are driven by I’m not sure exactly what, but it involves the following: resentment of “experts” (or at least academics), stubborn resistance to investigation, laziness, prejudice, selfishness. It is not accidental that religious fundamentalism, spiritualism, occultism, etc, are usually related to reactionary politics and xenophobia (among many other kinds of hatred). There probably is nothing to be done, because the imperviousness to higher order logic and evidence is probably related to basal features of primate neural systems. Or perhaps it’s the psychological artifact of social systems that prize individual purchasing decision, division-of-labor production, and organizations based on accumulations of capital of other people. Whatever it is, natural selection has a solution for this defect in our species or social organization: extinction. And it’s looking more likely every day that this world-view is going to make way very soon for the radiation of other life forms.
In case you haven’t seriously considered visit Cedarville U’s website, below I provide a little teaser about what awaits you.
What do you think the chances are that either of these dolts would use JC’s book, “WEIT” in their classes? What are the chances that any of their students will ever learn about Gould, JC, Myers, Dawkins, et. al. from their lectures?
I once wrote to one of their “profs” asking how he might be explain god placing nipples on men. He said he didn’t really know but advised me to convey my question to one of his favorite professors and mentors teaching at a 7 Day Adventist asylum in Loma Linda, CA.
Oh yea…. logic, reason, evidence and respect for knowledge and learning is at the core of their world-view all right.
Check ’em out. You’ll wonder no longer.
http://www.cedarville.edu/academics/Science-and-Mathematics/Faculty-Staff.aspx
~Rev El
——–
“Dr. H” was born and raised on a small farm outside of Albany, Ohio. He received a B.A. in chemistry from Cedarville College in 1998 and a Ph.D. from the University of Kentucky. He currently serves as an associate professor of chemistry and is the program director for forensic science at Cedarville. He also serves as president of the Creation Research Science Education Foundation and is a member of the Creation Research Society and the American Chemical Society. His primary research interests at the moment are the removal of toxic metals (such as mercury) from water and the geochemistry of the Flood.
And then there’s this:
Dr. “E” serves as professor of physics and mathematics and has been at Cedarville for 20 years. He received his B.S. in physics and mathematics (1963) from Hobart College, and both his M.S. in physics (1965) and his Ph.D. in theoretical physics (1969) from Syracuse University. He is a member of a professional organization for science teachers (N.S.T.A.) and a professional physics organization, the A.A.P.T. Dr. “E” specializes in the use of computers and technology in physics and science education. Recently, he presented a seminar on elementary science education at the Florida Association of Christian Colleges and Schools. He is active in his home church as a deacon, church clerk, choir member, occasional Sunday school teacher, and on the Evangelism Explosion outreach team. His hobbies include reading, amateur radio, and playing several musical instruments.
Fascinating…
this guy, however seems like a fish out of water: Dr. Chen serves as Associate Professor of Physics and has been at Cedarville since 2001. He earned his B.S. (1989) from Shandong University, M.S. (1992) from the Institute of Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences and Ph.D. (1997) from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Dr. Chen also holds a special term appointment at Argonne National Laboratory. Dr. Chen’s research interests include medium-range order in amorphous materials, fluctuation electron microscopy, interface roughness and dynamical surface growth. He is a member of the American Physical Society, the Materials Research Society and the American Association for the Advancement of Science. Dr. Chen has published numerous papers in peer-reviewed journals and has presented his research in many conferences. He was also a recipient of the Southwestern Ohio Council for Higher Education Faculty Excellence in Teaching Award (2008). In his spare time, Dr. Chen enjoys hiking, volleyball, classical music and literature. He and his wife reside in Beavercreek.
He’s one of the only ones I saw where there was no mention of his religious activities…
And what about Dr. ‘H?” That he chose to allow that mugshot of his to remain on the site is another matter altogether. His mugshot and bio are simply terrifying….. in every possible way.
I think I may have seen his mugshot on “America’s Most Wanted.”
What the hell is goin’ on within his cranial cavity?
~Rev. El
“The supernatural” seems to me to be simply another name for “Imagination Land.” It seems like a yearning for childhood, consistent with their God’s “Our Father” epithet. Just as any child can tell you, solemn-faced, why reality-based criticisms of their imaginary playland are totally off-base (“Silly grown-ups!”), so too can believers counter every reality-based argument by simply looking at you like you’re an idiot and sadly shaking their heads… or by closing their eyes tightly and holding their breaths. This is an argument you can’t possibly win — try it with the nearest 4-year-old playing dolls, if you don’t believe me.
Thank you for the link. I needed to read something that sounded sensible. An antidote to muddled thinking, if you will.
Jason Rosenhouse wrote: “What they need are good arguments for why they are wrong about the implications of evolution, and they are certainly not getting them from he philosophers and theologians.”
No disagreements with the general idea but in the end, people also need to be willing to hear the arguments. I’d argue that we’re living in the golden age of evolution writing – there are a great number of books written for a wide variety of audience, including a number of popular books.
There are some philosophers (maybe not theologians but certainly religious historians) that are writing good books. Of course the people that really need to read Boyer or Pigliucci are grabbing books by Ray Comfort and Ken Hamm or Barbara Armstrong and Francis Collins at best.
Scientific arguments supporting evolution aren’t hard to find but you have to at least be open to the possibility they’re right. On The Sandwalk (http://sandwalk.blogspot.com/2010/04/chris-mooney-vs-atheists-part-xxxiv.html), Larry talks about Mooneybaum which is an interesting read. More importantly, there’s data…63% of American’s don’t god’s existence. It’s not even a question for debate for most.
Last 2 sentences should read:
More importantly, there’s data…63% of American’s don’t QUESTION god’s existence. It’s not even a question for debate for most.
Off-topic (since you don’t seem to have a ‘Contact’ facility in place)
Fired NASA employee alleges religious discrimination over Intelligent Design, which of course has nothing whatever to do with religion
“The lawsuit (court number #BC435600) was filed by David Coppedge, an information technology specialist…”
Seems he’s not capable of processing information himself.
Empirically, I seem to be running across an exceptionally high positive correlation between IT as a career and support for ID. I don’t believe it’s due simply to the similarity in initials… maybe computer people are so used to programming engineered artifacts (as opposed to observing the natural world) that their world-view is ultimately colored by their circumstances?
Thunderfoot did a superb job of eviscerating Casey Luskin on You Tube.