nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW
13,254
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 1:
Line 1: − + + + +
Debate: If not naturalism, how do we decide which supernatural explanation is correct? (view source)
Revision as of 14:50, May 21, 2008
, 14:50, May 21, 2008Loaded question and false assumption.
What makes one supernatural explanation of something more valid than another? I feel this is a central problem of religion- we tend to accept the beliefs that are prevalent in our own culture despite there being numerous non-natural explanations for the same things.
What makes one supernatural explanation of something more valid than another? I feel this is a central problem of religion- we tend to accept the beliefs that are prevalent in our own culture despite there being numerous non-natural explanations for the same things. {{unsigned|Paddyduffy}}
: You're missing a question: How do we first decide whether to go for a natural or supernatural explanation?
: Answer to both questions: See which explanation is more consistent with the evidence. The implicit assumption that this cannot be done with a supernatural explanation is false.
: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 10:50, 21 May 2008 (EDT)