1. Can Science Study the Supernatural? Vic Stenger

2. Top scientists don’t seem to think so ✦ Science is a way of knowing about the natural world. It is limited to explaining the natural world through natural causes. Science can say nothing about the supernatural. Whether God exists or not is a question about which science is neutral. ✦ –National Academy of Sciences

3. But the media think so...

4. Spiritual gurus think so...

5. And theists think so...

6. But the courts don’t think so ✦ McLean v. Arkansas (1982) State law mandated teaching creation science along with evolution. Federal Judge William R. Overton ruled creation science is religion and law is unconstitutional. Unnecessarily, also declared creation science not science. Forced to define science.

7. Overton’s definition of science (with help of Michael Ruse) it is guided by natural law; it has to be explained by reference to natural law; it is testable against the empirical world; its conclusions are tentative, that is, are not necessarily the final word; it is falsifiable.

8. Reaction of philosopher Larry Laudan Creation science is testable, tentative, falsifiable. Falsified science can still be science, just wrong science. Arkansas decision would come back to haunt science by "perpetuating and canonizing a false stereotype on what science is and how it works." The result: Intelligent Design

9. ✦ “In our greatest universities, naturalism– the doctrine that nature is "all there is"–is the virtually unquestioned assumption that underlies not only natural science but intellectual work of all kinds.” ✦ –Phillip Johnson

10. But the courts still don’t think science can study supernatural ✦ Kitzmuller, et al. v. Dover, Pa. Area School District (2005) BOE attemped to insert Intelligent Design creationism into science curriculum. Federal Judge John E. Jones III ruled that ID was religion and teaching it in science classes was unconstitutional. Again the Judge went further than necessary in also ruling that ID was not science. Witnesses from both sides testified that ground rules of science would have to be broadened to allow consideration of supernatural forces.

11. Science can and does study the supernatural! ✦ Ontological naturalism: ✦ Only natural processes and events exist. ✦ Metaphysics ✦ Methodological naturalism: ✦ Assume only natural processes for purpose of inquiry ✦ Physics

12. Applying methodological naturalism to the supernatural Take empirical data in normal scientific way. If no natural explanation is even remotely plausible, then we may entertain possibility of a supernatural process. Impossible? No.

13. Example: Intercessory prayer ✦ Suppose independent experiments showed conclusively that Catholic prayers heal the sick– ✦ while Jewish, Protestant, Muslim prayers have no effect. What plausible natural explanation?

14. Catholics were right after all Say 3 Our Fathers and 4 Hail Marys and call me in the morning

15. Good prayer experiments have been done Mayo Clinic (2001) Duke University (2005) Harvard, Mayo,.. (2006) No significant effects seen

16. Other scientific tests of supernatural Revealed truth is testable

17. Conclusion Science can study the supernatural Science does study the supernatural has not found Science has not found the supernatural