1.3 Methodological Naturalism

Methodological Naturalism

As opposed to “philosophical materialism” already mentioned, there is a related term, “methodological naturalism” (MN). MN does not make any assumptions about the existence or non-existence of the supernatural. MN is the operative principle by which most science is done, regardless of the religious beliefs (or non-belief) of the scientist. Methodological naturalism is “the belief that science should explain phenomena only in terms of entities and properties that fall within the category of the natural, such as by natural laws acting either through known causes or by chance” (Ted Davis, Robin Collins, “Methodological Naturalism” in The History of Science and Religion in the Western Tradition: An Encyclopedia).

Methodological naturalism is a method of studying the physical universe, based on a belief that science’s ability to describe is limited to things that are natural. It assumes that ordinary, natural processes are at work and can be described, quantified, studied, and often predicted. A scientist relies on methodological naturalism simply because it is how the world appears to work. Because the universe and the things in it operate according to natural, orderly laws and principles, nature can be explored in a rational, systematic way.

In pagan mythologies, nature has a will of its own, or is under the control of unpredictable supernatural deities, who act according to their whims. If this were the case, scientists would be unable to do their jobs, because there wouldn’t be regular, physical laws underlying the natural world which can be discovered through systematic, repeatable experiments and observations.

In contrast, the Bible portrays God as a God of law, orderliness, and consistency, so His creation can be expected to act according to orderly processes, at least most of the time. Methodological naturalism is not necessarily a threat to Christian belief, as long as we recognize its inherent limitations, because it does not rule out that miracles can occur. When Jesus multiplied the loaves and fishes, that event cannot (or arguably, should not) be explained in naturalistic terms. However, once the loaves were eaten and the people's bodies received nutrients and strength from the food, no miraculous explanation is needed to explain the physiological effects. We might still consider the working of the body to be "miraculous" as a statement of faith and wonder, but it's a different sort of miracle.

Methodological naturalism has no claim on explaining the initial miracle, but it does have power to explain the natural processes by which nutrients are digested and broken down by enzymes, absorbed into the cells, energy is given off, etc. These are repeatable, natural processes that can be observed and quantified by using scientific methods. A Christian scientist is free to study the processes involved, while still granting the possibility that in some cases God may perform miracles that may or may not be fully explained scientifically, either as to the details of how or why they occurred.

We should note, however, that this view of the necessity of science being governed by methodological naturalism is contested by some creationists, because it seems to exclude God or supernatural causes from scientific inquiry by definition. This is a valid criticism which should at least be considered further. One question to consider is, what would science look like and how would it operate, if it allowed supernatural cause and effect as explanations?