Less Wrong is a community blog devoted to refining the art of human rationality. Please visit our About page for more information.

James_Forrest comments on Excluding the Supernatural - Less Wrong

37 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 12 September 2008 12:12AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (139)

Sort By: Old

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: James_Forrest 12 September 2008 10:46:38PM 0 points [-]

>>So... is the idea here, that creationism could be true, but even if it were true, you wouldn't be >>allowed to teach it in science class, because science is only about "natural" things?

If god(s) exist and (s)he/they/it created the universe and we possessed irrefutable evidence for both of those things, then s(he)/they/it would be "natural", and so, yes, you would be allowed to teach this in science class in that case.

>>Let me try again. People deploy the term "god" in different ways and mean different things by it.

There are in fact three definitions I am aware of:

(1) Theist - god(s) interfere in the world today and listen when we do stuff like "pray", (2) Deist - god(s) created the world at the beginning, but no longer actively interfere after than point, and (3) Pantheist - god(s) are a metpahor for a concept like "mother nature" or "the laws of physics".