if naturalism is the base assumption of evolution...


rev.goetz wrote:
snex wrote:
then what are the base assumptions of ID? how can those assumptions be
validated?

But I am an evolutionist that does not assume naturalism.

James Goetz

<devils advocate>
if you do not assume naturalism, then how do you arrive at a conclusion
of evolution? you might say "based upon the evidence," but if you do
not assume naturalism, in what way is evidence a valid indicator of
anything?
</devil's advocate>

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: See how evolutionists lie to your face....
    ... ...and yet you are unable to offer any evidence to support this ... Naturalism). ... Evolution says Naturalism is true; ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: New to the Creation/Evolution Debate
    ... stack up in such a way that GRADUALISTIC evolution would be supported. ... least amount of evidence. ... Even great scientists such ... NATURALISM, not the level of evidence available at the time. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Real scientist (Einstein) versus fake scientists (neo-Darwinists)
    ... > evidence for evolution truly is. ... > that evolution happens so quickly, that it LEAVES NO TRANSITIONAL FORMS ... some other driving principle will have to be found. ... > things AS THEY TRULY ARE, not as the philosophy of naturalism predicts ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Artificial & Pseudo Science
    ... their evolution stances and cliches. ... they've made their minds up outside the realm of science, ... merely creating artificial evidence or interpreting real evidence to ... philosophical naturalism with naturalistic methodology. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: See how evolutionists lie to your face....
    ... ...and yet you are unable to offer any evidence to support this ... It's what makes science possible. ... Naturalism). ... Evolution says Naturalism is true; ...
    (talk.origins)
Quantcast