Search
-
Recent Posts
- A rose by any other name is still a rose⦠14/06/2026
- Some brief new thoughts on Genesis 6 09/06/2026
- Ideology as brain surgery 06/06/2026
- What turns Evangelicals Catholic? 03/06/2026
- British values were Evangelical Christian values 30/05/2026
Recent Comments
- Jon Garvey on Some brief new thoughts on Genesis 6
- Jon Garvey on Some brief new thoughts on Genesis 6
- Peter Hickman on Some brief new thoughts on Genesis 6
- Jon Garvey on Speech suppression more contagious than COVID – and certainly deadlier
- Ben on Speech suppression more contagious than COVID – and certainly deadlier
Post Archive
Daily Archives: 09/09/2016
How regular is normal?
Tom Gilson runs the excellent Thinking Christian blog, but has also made a useful contribution to the recent debate over methodological naturalism. In 2011 he did a multi-part series here on why science neither needs, nor benefits from, MN, and came to the positive point with his alternative here. In the main, he favours a change of nomenclature rather than of practice, because of the ease with which MN, originally coined by a Christian (and not many decades ago, at that) to distinguish it from metaphysical naturalism, has actually become a potent means of endorsing the mythical link between science and atheism.
Posted in Creation, Science, Theology
Leave a comment