Science and Materialism.

I was interested in this quote from Martin Redfern's article.

"Everyone is entitled to their beliefs, but what annoys Eugenie Scott is the way in which the received wisdom of Genesis is given equal or higher status to scientific evidence; and the way in which the latter is used selectively.

'In the card game of creationism, the Bible trumps science every time,' she says.

But in her game, science is dealt a hand that is purely materialistic. Ideas of a supernatural being belong in a different game, be it philosophy or theology."

Fuller Dissent.

Steve Fuller has a new book out:

I have pre-ordered a copy so I will be interested in his view of this controversy on this broad canvas. I wonder if his arguments will include things like this?

Methodological Naturalism

Just over a year ago Paul Nelson posed this question here

"Ask oneself a simple question. Suppose life actually were designed by a nonhuman intelligence -- would methodological naturalism allow us to discover that? If the answer is no, then methodological naturalism hinders scientific discovery and dictates the shape of reality as thoroughly as philosophical naturalism. If the answer is yes, then methodological naturalism is superfluous and says nothing more than that science should be empirical and testable."


Do you agree?