Philosophical naturalism

{{sources needed}}{{Philosophyscience}}

'''Philosophical naturalism''' is the doctrine that the natural world is all there is — in other words, that the supernatural is by definition impossible, since whatever is shown to exist ([[Falsification|via ''affecting'' the natural world]]) is clearly ''part of'' that same natural world.<ref group=note>It's a beautifully consistent position, unlike other antiquated anti-empirical views, e.g. variants of [[idealism]].</ref>

Basically all scientists (and a vast majority of modern philosophers) adhere to some version of naturalism, which is ''why'' reference to [[supernatural]] or [[Miracle|miraculous]] effects or forces is frowned upon in academia.<ref group=note>Really — naturalism is quite literally ''the reason why'' it's not okay to appeal to a friendly ghost named Casper in science papers.</ref>

==Metaphysical or methodological?==
Two refinements of the term "naturalism" that are of use for any rationalist to know are ''methodological'' naturalism (on the one hand) and ''metaphysical'' naturalism (on the other).<ref group=note>It is worth noting that metaphysical naturalism 'contains' methodological naturalism — surprise surprise — as its ''methodology'' of choice.</ref>

Science is itself a process based on ''methodological'' naturalism, i.e. treating the world as if ''metaphysical'' naturalism was the case, but ''without'' actually taking a stand on philosophical matters (outside of [[Philosophy of science|method]]).<ref group=note>This helps explain why [[skeptic]]s are the ones to take on the [[crank]]s; actual scientists are generally busy ''doing science'', and couldn't care less about the relentless flora of stillborn [[Anti-science|anti-scientific]] propositions out there. To the naturalists, ''nature'' — not man — is the arbiter, and we walked on the moon as a result.</ref>

''Metaphysical'' naturalism, on the other hand, is what it means to extend scientific principles all the way into the farthest reaches of philosophy. Scouting future territory for the natural sciences to conduct research in (and defending naturalism generally), metaphysical naturalism is what [[Richard Carrier]] simply describes as "science with less data",<ref>http://www.richardcarrier.info/philosophy.html</ref> operating ''in anticipation of'' scientific data where possible. This approach signifies the single least [[woo]]-prone way in which to engage any given speculatory topic, aside from the philosophically agnostic view of methodological naturalism.

Metaphysical naturalism is more or less a basic precept of all modern {{wpl|analytic philosophy||,}} which was itself formed partially in protest of the [[Hegel|centuries of woo that had accreted in philosophy]] (notably [[Time cube|German idealism]]) prior to the explosive triumph of modern science in the last 150 years or so.

Strict adherence to ''methodological'' naturalism creates [[God of the gaps|a theoretical space]] in which positions like [[NOMA]] may be compatibly held by those who chose to do so. ''Methodological'' naturalism is, as such, the "minimum position" to which science is reducible<ref group=note>An iota less naturalist than ''methodologically'' naturalist, and you start to pull the rug out from under your own feet in terms of scientific ''method''.</ref> — and it ''still'' entails [[WOMBAT|not giving the time of day]] to [[woo]]-meistry.

In that context, ''metaphysical'' naturalism simply means "closing" said NOMA/gaps space by taking the fight all the way against [[theology]] and [[accommodationism]].<ref group=note>{{IdEst}}, it's only ''metaphysical'' naturalism (out of the two) which finds it philosophically inconsistent for people to, say, perform perfectly rigorous science ''during the day'', and then go home to ''privately'' [[Cognitive dissonance|worship invisible phantasms]].</ref>

==Origins in methodological naturalism==
Philosophical naturalism is arguably the logical end-result of [[methodological naturalism]].  Methodological naturalism accepts that there is no way to contact, detect, or otherwise [[empiricism|empirically]] observe the supernatural. In consequence, methodological naturalists regard the [[scientific method]] as the best way to determine the [[truth]] about [[reality]]. Because supernatural, intelligent forces — if they exist — are unpredictable and hence unrepeatable,<ref group=note>And if that wasn't the case, we'd probably already know it.</ref> naturalists reject the possibility of supernatural or [[magic]]al intervention in the physical world. 

Philosophical naturalists take these beliefs one step further and reject the existence of the supernatural altogether, citing the utter lack of empirical evidence.  Because of the absence of scientific evidence backing up [[religion]], most philosophical naturalists are also [[atheists]] (or at most [[deists]]).

==Opposition by religion==
Arrayed against philosophical naturalism are religious schools of thought which argue for the existence of the [[supernatural]] alongside the natural. In order to compete with science, they have created [[Pseudoscience|pseudoscientific theories]] such as [[intelligent design]] which supposedly prove supernatural intervention in natural phenomena. However, they also assert that the supernatural is somehow [[Non-Overlapping Magisteria|immune to]] science. These theories, therefore, work about as well as [[cargo cult]]s.

==Do not equate with==
Although these are related to naturalism, there are differences:

===Materialism===
{{main|Materialism}}
All things are composed of matter and all [[emergent phenomena]] (such as thoughts) are the result of material interactions.

===Physicalism===
The only things are those subject to the laws of [[physics]].

===Scientism===
{{main|Scientism}}
All that can be known is what science tells us.

===Nominalism===
Abstract objects exist as predicates, not universals (as opposed to [[Plato]]nism).

==See also==
*[[Logical positivism]]
*[[Methodological naturalism]]

==External links==
*Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy entry of [http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/naturalism/ naturalism]
*Barbara Forrest. [http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/barbara_forrest/naturalism.html Methodological Naturalism and Philosophical Naturalism: Clarifying the Connection.] ''Philo'', Vol. 3, No. 2 (Fall-Winter 2000), pp. 7-29.

==Notes==
{{reflist|group=note|2}}

==References==
{{reflist}}

[[Category:Philosophy]]
[[Category:Philosophy of science]]
[[Category:Science]]

Categories: Philosophy, Philosophy of science, Science