tft-short-4578168
Ken Ammi’s True Free Thinker:
BooksYouTube or OdyseeTwitterFacebookSearch

Is atheism to be correlated with science? And, on “Material Creationism”

For some odd reason, it is ubiquitously promulgated (as a well within the box atheist group-think talking-point de jour) that atheism has commandeered science (by definition and necessity, some claim). On the other hand, it is a historical fact that science itself, along with its methods and fields, were premised upon the belief that the universe was created by a rational God whose creation could therefore be rationally discerned.

Part of the issue has to do with terminology, how we define the terms Atheism and science. As for atheism see, Definition of “Atheism” and Variations of Atheism. What we are dealing with in this context is a naturalistic (naturalism) or materialistic (materialism) worldview. This is in reference to believing that the natural, the material, is all that there is:

John Post (Metaphysics, A Contemporary Introduction),

“…the universe contains everything there is or ever was or will be.”

Carl Sagan (Cosmos),

“The cosmos is all there is or ever was or ever will be.”

These, of course, are faith based statements.

Thus, it is supposed that science must be conducted on the basis of an atheistic, naturalistic, materialistic framework. This is to be done for the very reason that we need science in order to explore that which we know to exist: material objects (subatomic particles, etc. are another issue).
However, the Biblical view, for example, may, perhaps, be referred to as Material Creationism. This would be a useful term to employ in order to distinguish those worldview philosophies which view the universe as an illusion or some such thing form those that view the universe as being a creation which is outside of, separate from, beyond and thus, not an extension of God.
On this view, God created the box, the universe, to function according to a material cause resulting in a material effect. This is not only what makes chronological/linear time function but is the very premise upon which science is based.

Thus, science need not presume atheism or materialism but recognize that it is a tool which explores the material. From this point, science can seek causes for effects and an open mind would follow the evidence where it leads: it may lead to a natural cause or a supernatural cause. Science is a tool which changes in order to meet the job at hand. If scientific evidence accumulates for the existence of God then science will change—or, a new field of science will be developed—in order to accommodate the evidence.

What we are dealing with is the difference between material causes and efficient causes. Think, for example, of you conceiving with your mind that you will hit a ball with a bat. What was the efficient cause of the ball’s movement? Your immaterial mind (here, materialists would say the material brain, for more on this distinction, see On God and the creation: how does the immaterial interact with the material?). What was the material cause? The bat’s force/momentum. From here we would ask how the stick came to be in motion itself and would conclude that it was due to its being grasped by a hand which swung it. And how did the hand come to grasp it? By the contraction of muscles. And on, and on you would go in a regress that would take us to the efficient cause: the exercise of volition as expressing that which the mind had conceived, etc.

Now, it would be to bring the polemic to a childish school yard level to state something to the likes of, “Well, simply running away from the hard work of science by saying, ‘God’did’it’ is a science stopper which is why religion is superstitious and its adherents are ignorant.”
Rather, the Material Creationism position would claim that the evidence points towards a creator and goes on from there to explore God’s creation: this is actually the view upon which science is premised.

The real problem, for atheists, when they claim that science implies atheism, proves atheism, etc. is that they are admitting to being purposefully close minded. How so?

First, they claim that science is based on materialism—either by presupposing it or by concluding in it—and that this is how it concludes in atheism (there is a certain amount of circular illogic here). In other words, science is purposefully designed to function only within material parameters, uses only material tools, explores only the material and comes only to material conclusions. Bottom line: science is a tool that is meant to explore only that which is within the box. Next, they claim that science only comes to material conclusions based on only exploring the material and so: the material is all that there is.

This is tantamount of sitting in a corner, refusing to turn around, and claiming that the corner is all that exists. It is like wearing red colored spectacles, seeing everything in shades of red, refusing to take off the spectacles, and concluding that red is the only color that exists.

In conclusion, what can we conclude about atheists who claim that atheism is to be correlated with science and moreover, that it is science which concludes in atheism? They are admitting, even without realizing it, that they are purposefully refusing to look beyond the materialism which they presuppose in the first place.
They have buried their heads in the sand of a material method, they only see the material sand, and they conclude that the sand is all that there is. This is none but circular illogic.

Thus, when an atheist claims that atheism is backed by science, smile, feel the confidence of truth and elucidate the facts to them.

For more info on this issue, see:

Atheism and Science – The Magus

Atheism Plus “Science” – An Infinite Digress

Atheism and Science – Is There a Relation?, part 1

Atheism and Science – Is There a Relation?, part 2 – On the Difference Between Science and Philosophy: Massimo Pigliucci

Atheism and Science – Is There a Relation?, part 3 – On the Difference Between Science and Philosophy: Richard Dawkins

Atheism and Science : “Love the Lord Your God With All Your Mind”-Matthew 22:37

Question for atheists: is “God did it” a science stopper?


Posted

in

by

Tags: