Facebook Instagram Twitter RSS Feed PodBean Back to top on side

The Many Inadequate Justifications of Methodological Naturalism

In: Organon F, vol. 26, no. 1
Robert A. Larmer

Details:

Year, pages: 2019, 5 - 24
Language: eng
Keywords:
Ad hominem fallacy; nomological science; historical science; super-natural agency; inductive generalization; Robert Pennock.
Article type: Research Article
Document type: Research Article
About article:
Contrary to proponents’ claims, methodological naturalism is not metaphysically neutral. Consequently, its acceptance as a practice requires justification. Unfortunately for its advocates, attempts to justify it are failures. It cannot be defended as a definition, or a self-imposed limitation, of science, nor, more modestly, as an inductively justified commitment to natural causes. As a practice, it functions not to further scientific investigation, but rather to impose an ex-planatory straitjacket.
How to cite:
ISO 690:
Larmer, R. 2019. The Many Inadequate Justifications of Methodological Naturalism. In Organon F, vol. 26, no.1, pp. 5-24. 1335-0668. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31577/orgf.2019.26102

APA:
Larmer, R. (2019). The Many Inadequate Justifications of Methodological Naturalism. Organon F, 26(1), 5-24. 1335-0668. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31577/orgf.2019.26102
About edition:
Publisher: Institute of Philosophy of the Slovak Academy of Sciences, Institute of Philosophy of the Czech Academy of Sciences
Published: 22. 1. 2019
Rights:
Robert A. Larmer