-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Is metaphysical naturalism a worldview that is ultimately based on faith?
- Thread starter Gambit
- Start date
Why do you say that?
(consider thus: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/metaphysics/)
leibowde84
Veteran Member
I voted "no" because, unless a person is stubborn and refuses to change their materialistic worldview if verifiable evidence of the supernatural comes up, then it seems to be the prudent position. In other words, they believe that the cosmos is all that exists at the moment. If verifiable evidence of the supernatural did come about, I would assume they would alter their worldview.
From Wikipedia:
Metaphysical naturalism, also called ontological naturalism, philosophical naturalism and scientific materialism is a worldview which holds that there is nothing but natural elements, principles, and relations of the kind studied by the natural sciences, i.e., those required to understand our physical environment by mathematical modelling.
It can be called 'faith' as it is a 'belief without proof'.
Metaphysical naturalism, also called ontological naturalism, philosophical naturalism and scientific materialism is a worldview which holds that there is nothing but natural elements, principles, and relations of the kind studied by the natural sciences, i.e., those required to understand our physical environment by mathematical modelling.
It can be called 'faith' as it is a 'belief without proof'.
YmirGF
Bodhisattva in Recovery
I suppose it is in how one interprets the word "metaphysics".
I’d say (and have often said) that metaphysical “materialism” as traditionally defined--e.g.,
--combined with the traditional definition of “matter” such as found in chemistry textbooks (any object that has mass and volume), is a thesis that has been refuted by the empirical findings and theories of modern physics. Photons exist, and photons are objects void of rest mass. Therefore, the thesis of materialism is false.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/materialism?s=t
--combined with the traditional definition of “matter” such as found in chemistry textbooks (any object that has mass and volume), is a thesis that has been refuted by the empirical findings and theories of modern physics. Photons exist, and photons are objects void of rest mass. Therefore, the thesis of materialism is false.
Evidently one cannot mathematically model subjective experience, so accordingly subjective experience would not be "natural". One cannot mathematically model volition AKA free will, so that would be another of those non-natural items.
Unveiled Artist
Veteran Member
Is materalism based on faith? Id say no. If I understand it right, its based on what we can identify with our five senses. What we can study. One doesnt need faith to believe materalism when it exists without our beliefs.
Why add metaphysical?
Gambit
Well-Known Member
I would say that all metaphysical positions ultimately entail some element of faith.
Gambit
Well-Known Member
Because that qualifier is paramount to the subject matter at hand.
Gambit
Well-Known Member
Agreed.
Gambit
Well-Known Member
There is no verifiable evidence for either dark matter or dark energy. Yet, the majority of physicists believe that both exist.
Last edited:
Unveiled Artist
Veteran Member
How so?
EDIT
If materalism wasnt in parenthesis, then Id agree. Since its there, I dont see how naturalism and materalism is related to metaphysical. Thats why I asked.
Shad
Veteran Member
No it's based on inductive logic and reasoning based on current evidence with inferences between the data we have to fill the gaps for the data we lack. The issue is people turn this into a universal as if it were deductive reasoning. Also due to the nature of inductive methods new data can also be adapted into a new model thus "naturalism" as a term is always in flux. So arguments for naturalism a century from now could includes and/or remove a number of parameter dictating what we define as "naturalism". A new "law" of nature or the removal of a "law" which is now found wanting. Newtonian physics for an example has changed while also becoming part of modern physics thus changing the very definition of "naturalism" due to modification of ideas.
Last edited:
Gambit
Well-Known Member
Materialism is a metaphysical position.
Unveiled Artist
Veteran Member
When I think metaphysical, I think New Age terms. It's very confusing. Naturalism terms or just layman's terms are easier to identify.
Other than that, I don't know what you mean by metaphysical.
Gambit
Well-Known Member
Metaphysics is a branch of philosophy. That's why I asked this question on the "philosophy" form.
Unveiled Artist
Veteran Member
Looking up metaphysical naturalism, I don't see how that relates to materalism. But to understand the origin or nature of life, I guess from a naturalistic perspective, that still has some faith only because we don't know everything about life. So, some sort of faith or, probably a better word, trust what we know is true, is needed when looking into the nature of life or metaphysics. That's my take.