Christopher C. Lund wrote:
I think Ed and I are agreeing, although initially I may have put things sloppily. We agree that science cannot reject supernaturalism altogether (how could it disprove that prayer has no other-worldly effects?), but it can investigate "claims about the supernatural" (the phrase I used before and the phrase Doug was using), as soon as those claims begin to involve the material world.
Just to clarify, and I apologize if I'm misreading or being pedantic, I don't think it's enough to say that we can test claims about the supernatural as soon as those claims begin to involve the natural world. I think it has to be stated more rigorously than that. The supernatural claim has to make specific predictions about how the natural world will be affected. Science can then test the predicted effect. James Randi does this all the time, for example. But a broader claim - say, that God answers prayer - is immune to such testing precisely because it involves the willful act of a supernatural entity that we can neither control nor predict. If someone prays that a loved one would recover from a disease and they do, that is viewed as confirmation of the efficacy of prayer; if they don't, then that is viewed simply as the will of God that the loved one not recover. If you can't make a prediction, you can't truly test the idea because any outcome would fail to disconfirm it.
I don't want to get into an argument defending ID. Others do it better. And I don't find ID persuasive. But I wonder what will happen to those who do. Let me ask people on the listserv this next question: Should the government force private religious schools to explicitly deny ID? (If it is like banning the phlogistonistic view of chemistry or teachings contrary to the germ theory of disease, should we even hesitate?)
I think it is self-evident that the government should not force private religious schools to explicitly deny ID, or any other belief they have. Private religious schools should be allowed to teach whatever they want, as they are private. However, that doesn't mean, for instance, that government-run universities can't set standards of admission that take into account what is being taught and whether it adequately prepares a student for college level work (as in the current lawsuit against the UC system).
Ed Brayton _______________________________________________ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
