Topics Science

Question What exactly is the nature, scope, and origin of "methodological naturalism"? What are the most authoritative sources to learn about the origin and nature of methodological naturalism as it is employed in the sciences? I would appreciate any reply to this question. Thanks!

Accepted:
October 6, 2007

Comments

On the one hand... There's some controversy here, but a nice, readable paper by Bradley Monton argues that methodological naturalism neither is nor should be a presupposition of science. Monton provides further references to the literature. To see the paper, click here.

I think Monton makes a case that we can't use methodological naturalism as a criterion of demarcation between science and non-science. But then there may not be much we can say by way of offering strict criteria of demarcation between science and other activities. Even if science isn't, as it were ,"by definition" naturalistic [aside: when someone says that something is so "by definition, you should be suspicious] it's not an accident that across the sciences, researchers almost always start with and end up with naturalistic hypotheses. That includes researchers who count themselves as religious believers. There's no one simple reason for this; it's partly a matter of history, partly a matter of shared intellectual values, partly a matter of what makes for research programs that lead to good experimental questions, and a good deal else. This means that coming up with a good account of the more-than-coincidental connection between science and naturalism calls for reading around in lots of areas. Other panelists may have some more specific suggestions for further reading.