History, Evolution, and The Darwin Debate

Darwiniana header image 2

Platinga on Dover

March 9th, 2006 · No Comments

Platinga discusses Dover ruling.

Observing methodological naturalism thus hamstrings science by precluding science from reaching what would be an enormously important truth about the world. It might be that, just as a result of this constraint, even the best science in the long run will wind up with false conclusions.

What’s wrong with a Spinozistic ‘methodological naturalism’?
If scientists could really deal with evidence for design they would drop methodological naturalism in a moment. The problem is the metaphysical boundary to what is known, and this sabotages design, including natural selection, apparently.
Methodological naturalism does, it is true, blinker thought. But so does a spiritual principle.
Design thinking can backfire too: and blind one to the presence of something naturalistic but not natural selection.

As the eonic effect and its model shows, the greatest failure of the design argument is the Old Testament itself. The Bible records something significant, but blinds us to its meaning.

Tags: Evolution

0 responses so far ↓

  • There are no comments yet...Kick things off by filling out the form below.

Leave a Comment