Methodological Naturalism

ALL CURRENT AND PROSPECTIVE PARTICIPANTS SHOULD READ THE FOLLOWING STATEMENT OF FORUM EDITORIAL POLICY:  "Against Katastematic Supremacy - Pleasure Is A Unified Good, Not A House Divided Against Itself."

New Graphics: Are You On Team Epicurus? | Comparison Chart: Epicurus vs. Other Philosophies | Chart Of Key Epicurean Quotations | Accelerating Study Of Canonics Through Philodemus' "On Methods Of Inference" | Note to all users: If you have a problem posting in any forum, please message Cassius  

PDF

    I think I mentioned that term on the first episode of the letter to Pythocles, during the discussion as to whether the ancients were really doing "science". I'd have to listen back to be sure.

    But I certainly think it's applicable to what Epicurus was doing in the 4th century.

    Quote from Joshua

    I think I mentioned that term on the first episode of the letter to Pythocles, during the discussion as to whether the ancients were really doing "science". I'd have to listen back to be sure.

    But I certainly think it's applicable to what Epicurus was doing in the 4th century.

    Sorry if I missed that! :thumbup:

    It seems to me, too, to possibly be applicable to Epicurus's outlook.

    I guess that's the question.

    Was Epicurus asserting that there was nothing supernatural?

    Or, was he asserting that nothing supernatural would have any impact on our universe so it would be irrelevant to our lives and our happiness?

    Functionally, those two could work similarly or identically, but they are two different things.

    Sections like this one from Lucretius Book 2 incline me strongly toward the first of those two intrepretations:

    Humphries version around line 1079

    Holding this knowledge, you can't help but see

    That nature has no tyrants over her,

    But always acts of her own will; she has

    No part of any godhead whatsoever.

    By all that's holy in the tranquil calm

    Where the gods pass serene eternal days

    I ask you - which of them is strong enough

    To rule the sum of things, to hold the reins

    Of absolute profundity, or move the skies

    To turn together? Who can warm the lands

    To fruitfulness with fire sent down from heaven?

    Who can be immanent in every time,

    In every place - to cloud the world in dark,

    To shake the quiet areas of sky

    With terrible sound? Who sends the lightning's blast

    Even at his own temples? Who departs

    To wilderness, but as he goes, in wrath,

    Lets fly the bolts that pass the guilty by

    And murder undeserving innocents?

    I don't think that methodological naturalism asserts that there is nothing supernatural--that to my understanding would be 'philosophical naturalism'. Methodological naturalism is not so much a doctrine or belief, as it is an attitude or approach to inquiry.

    But to state my own position plainly, I think that Epicurus was a philosophical naturalist, who further employed methodological naturalism in his study of nature.

    By contrast, Dr. Francis Collins who is a renowned geneticist and was the the head of the Human Genome Project is not at all a naturalist, being a Christian, but in his scientific work he sought natural explanations for the phenomena of nature.

    Quote from Joshua

    I don't think that methodological naturalism asserts that there is nothing supernatural--that to my understanding would be 'philosophical naturalism'. Methodological naturalism is not so much a doctrine or belief, as it is an attitude or approach to inquiry.

    You are absolutely correct, Joshua . Thanks! Very good points to remember.

    Quote from Joshua

    But to state my own position plainly, I think that Epicurus was a philosophical naturalist, who further employed methodological naturalism in his study of nature.

    I would concur as well. I think that is an excellent way to phrase it. And so I would agree with Cassius above as well in saying Epicurus did positively assert that there was nothing supernatural. As Cassius mentioned in the most recent podcast (Nicely done on the 12 Fundamentals btw), the Epicureans could be lauded for their ALWAYS looking for a material/physical explanation even when confronted by Alexander the Oracle-monger and his magic snake. So, the Epicureans would assert, as you said Joshua that there is nothing supernatural (I would add: Because I assume they believed the universe was infinite and there was nothing "outside" of the universe.) therefore, they were "philosophical naturalists" in their perspective. As such, they would (in our terminology here) be "methodological naturalists" in their day to day dealings with the world.

    Quote from Joshua

    By contrast, Dr. Francis Collins who is a renowned geneticist and was the the head of the Human Genome Project is not at all a naturalist, being a Christian, but in his scientific work he sought natural explanations for the phenomena of nature.

    You are on fire, my friend! :) Excellent point there as well. That is a good illustration of the different permutations possible in the naturalist and scientist categories.

    Thank you both, Joshua and Cassius !

Finding Things At EpicureanFriends.com

Here is a list of suggested search strategies:

  • Website Overview page - clickable links arrranged by cards.
  • Forum Main Page - list of forums and subforums arranged by topic. Threads are posted according to relevant topics. The "Uncategorized subforum" contains threads which do not fall into any existing topic (also contains older "unfiled" threads which will soon be moved).
  • Search Tool - icon is located on the top right of every page. Note that the search box asks you what section of the forum you'd like to search. If you don't know, select "Everywhere."
  • Search By Key Tags - curated to show frequently-searched topics.
  • Full Tag List - an alphabetical list of all tags.