The Scientific Method - Radio 4 - In Our Time - Melvyn Bragg

source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01b1ljm/In_Our_Time_The_Scientific_Method/

The Atheist's Guide to Reality by Prof. Alex Rosenberg, Conway Hall, London

Organisers: WW Norton & Chris Street for AtheismUK, Humanists4Science & HASSNERS.

Date & Time: Saturday 25th February 2012, 2-3.00 pm.

Email me to reserve a seat. Just a couple of seats left. Its now essential to reserve a seat asap. Email me your name, and Atheist / Humanist Society affiliation.

Free entry, donations appreciated.

Prof. Alex Rosenberg (wiki) is chair of the Philosophy department at Duke University and co-director of Duke Center for Philosophy of Biology. Alex has written 12 books about the philosophy of biology and economics. He describes himself as a 'Naturalist'.
Alex Rosenberg is visiting the UK to talk about his new book 'The Atheist's Guide to Reality - Enjoying Life without Illusions', published by WW Norton.
'takes the sin of scientism as the ultimate virtue. Alex Rosenberg has sheared the nature of things down to the bedrock, and exposed our common vanity'. EO Wilson
'presents a brave and compelling treatise on why you should accept the universe for what it is, rather than what you would wish it to be. The Atheists Guide to Reality, like the best scholarship and science, removes you from your comfort zone and that is the only way to gain new and better perspectives on our place in the cosmos' Lawrence Krauss
 'Rosenberg's philosophical temperament is a dead ringer for David Hume's, and his wit isn't far behind either'. Rebecca Goldstein
'This eccentric, funny treatise on "scientism,"...takes a perverse delight in "nice nihilism." Rosenberg doesn't believe in free will, morality, or secular humanism ...this dismemberment of mainstream worldviews abounds with clever barbs and dry one-liners.' Village Voice

We can't avoid the persistent questions about the meaning of life-and the nature of reality. Philosopher Alex Rosenberg maintains that science is the only thing that can really answer them all of them. His bracing and ultimately upbeat book takes physics seriously as the complete description of reality and accepts all its consequences. He shows how physics makes Darwinian natural selection the only way life can emerge, and how that deprives nature of purpose, and human action of meaning, while it exposes conscious illusions such as free will and the self. The science that makes us nonbelievers provides the insight into the real difference between right and wrong, the nature of the mind, even the direction of human history. The Atheist's Guide to Reality draws powerful implications for the ethical and political issues that roil contemporary life. The result is nice nihilism, a surprisingly sanguine perspective atheists can happily embrace.
Read Alex Rothenberg talking about The Atheists Guide to Reality' at Indyweek.com 

The publishers WW Norton have booked a room in Conway Hall in Central London (2 minute walk from Holborn Tube station). 

H4S Science Resolution Revolution Competition

During 2012 do YOU resolve to discuss science?


Enter the Humanists4Science Science Resolution Revolution Competition!

New Year Resolutions are often all about ME! ... I'm going to go on a diet, get fitter - join a gym etc etc. During 2012 join the revolution and make a Science resolution.

Resolve to discuss anything scientific with somebody. That can mean discussing scientism or scientific method with a friend. Or maybe you could discuss scientific evidence or scientific thinking?

Enter the Humanists4Science (H4S) Science Resolution Revolution Competition.

Revolution Resolution by British Humanist Association (BHA) is inclusive and open to all, regardless of religion or belief. H4S are affiliated to BHA.

H4S Science Resolution Revolution Competition - Rules 

1. Everyone is eligible to enter the H4S Science Resolution Revolution Competition
2. Your resolution MUST include the words 'science', 'scientism' or 'scientific'.
3. There is no limit on the number of resolutions per entrant to the competition
4. Add your resolution onto the Revolution Resolution website by 29th February 2012.
5. Email a copy of your H4S Science Resolution Revolution Competition entry to Chair, Humanists4Science. Include your name, address & phone number by 29th February 2012.
6. Winners will be announced March 2012.

Examples

• I resolve by May 2012 to give a talk to my local primary school about 'My Passion for Science'.
• By June 2012 I resolve to discuss what I mean by 'scientific method' with 'J'.
• During March 2012 I resolve to discuss the science of stem cell research with 'A'.
• In 2012 I resolve to discuss with my creationist friend 'C' the scientific evidence for evolution by natural selection.
• I resolve to discuss during by May 2012 with 'D', the difference between 'science' & 'scientism', 'scientific'  & 'scientistic'.

Prizes

• All H4S Science Resolution Revolution Competition entrants receive 'Thank You' certificates.
• A minimum of 20 people entering the Competition triggers prize giving.
• Winner receives 'Magic of Reality - How we know what's really true' by Richard Dawkins (BHA Vice President)
• Runner-up receives 'On Being - A scientists exploration of the great questions of existence' by Peter Atkins (BHA Distinguished Supporter)

Competition Judges

• Chris Street, Chair of Humanists4Science and David McKnight, H4S Co-Founder. 
• Judges cannot enter the competition.

Humanism: Science, Scientific Evidence & Scientific Method

In line with February 2011 suggestions from Humanists4Science, for the first time the November 2011 British Humanist Association Strategy includes 'science' and 'scientific evidence' in the BHA Aims:-

• Humanism involves a naturalistic view of the universe.... humanists strive to be rational, looking to science in attempting to understand the universe.

• We support significant initiatives to meet global challenges, showing how these initiatives rest on our principles of accepting scientific evidence...   

For the first time BHA includes 'scientific method' in its definition of Humanism:-

• Humanists have trusted to the scientific method, evidence and reason to discover truths about the universe ...

Humanists4Science Vision

'A world in which important decisions are made by applying the scientific method to evidence rather than according to superstition.'

British Humanist Association Vision

'A world where everyone lives cooperatively on the basis of shared human values and respect for human rights.'

Celebrities discuss New Years Resolutions with Susan Blackmore

BHA definition of Humanism now includes 'scientific method'

Humanists4Science (H4S) Mission is "To promote, within the humanist community, the application of the scientific method to issues of concern to broader society." and the Humanists4Science (H4S) Vision is "A world in which important decisions are made by applying the scientific method to evidence rather than according to superstition."


In February 2011 Humanists4Science made written recommendations to the BHA Board to include 'science' and 'scientific method' in the BHA Strategy viz.

1) include 'science' in BHA Vision.
2) include in BHA Aim “humanists understand that reason and scientific method provide the best ways to understand the universe“
3) include in BHA Aim 'public understanding of science' and 'scientific method'

From November 2011 the BHA Strategic Aims mentions 'science' & 'scientific evidence':-

'humanists strive to be rational, looking to science in attempting to understand the universe'.

and

'We will give philosophical and practical support to significant initiatives to meet global challenges, showing how these initiatives rest on our principles of accepting scientific evidence'

Today I'm pleased to report that the BHA website has a new definition of humanism mentioning 'scientific method' twice:-

Humanism 
Throughout recorded history there have been non-religious people who have believed that this life is the only life we have, that the universe is a natural phenomenon with no supernatural side, and that we can live ethical and fulfilling lives on the basis of reason and humanity. They have trusted to the scientific method, evidence and reason to discover truths about the universe and placed human welfare and happiness at the centre of their ethical decision making.

and

Defining 'Humanism' 
Roughly speaking, the word humanist has come to mean someone who:

• trusts to the scientific method when it comes to understanding how the universe works and rejects the idea of the supernatural (and is therefore an atheist or agnostic) 
• makes their ethical decisions based on reason, empathy, and a concern for human beings and other sentient animals 
• believes that, in the absence of an afterlife and any discernible purpose to the universe, human beings can act to give their own lives meaning by seeking happiness in this life and helping others to do the same.

BHA Defining 'Humanism' (click image for larger view at 13th January 2012) or click following link for todays view  http://www.humanism.org.uk/humanism   

I'm delighted to advise that in the last year H4S has achieved its aims of including 'science' & 'scientific evidence' in the BHA Strategy and 'scientific method' in the BHA definition of Humanism.


Chris Street, 
Chair Humanists4Science
13th January 2012

'Humanists trust to a scientific and rational approach to finding out about the universe' - Lords Reform Bill debate

During the Lords Reform Bill, Lord Threthgowan asked (at 19:18:55) Andrew Copson, Chief Executive, BHA 'What do humanists stand for?' Watch the debate below:-



In summary Andrew Copson replied (at 19:19:15-19:19:40) saying that 'a good definition of a humanist was someone who had a view of life that was not religious, that located values and meaning in the here and now, who trusted to a scientific and rational approach to finding out about the universe, and to a human centered, present world centered approach to deciding what was the right thing to do and what meaning there could be in life'.

Read the transcript of the minutes featuring the Archbishop of Canterbury, Andrew Copson (BHA) & Elizabeth Hunter (Theos). Note: neither witnesses nor Members have had the opportunity to correct the record. The transcript is not yet an approved formal record of these proceedings.

The exchange in full:-

Q457 Lord Trefgarne: 
Can you give me a clue where you are coming from in all this? I have to confess that I am not as clear as I should be about what exactly humanists stand for.

Andrew Copson: 
I am the humanist. The British Humanist Association is an organisation that has particular aims. A good definition of a humanist would be someone who had a view of life that was not religious, who located values and meaning in the here and now, who trusted to a scientific and rational approach to finding out about the universe and who had a human-centred, present-world-centred approach in deciding what was right to do and what meaning there could be in life. The British Humanist Association is an organisation that promotes education about and public awareness of that view of things. It provides certain community services— for example, non-religious funerals and other services that non-religious people in the community find it difficult to access where those things have traditionally been provided by, for example, religious groups. A third area of work that we engage in is advocacy and public policy issues, particularly in questions of discrimination either in public life or in the treatment of individuals on the basis of religion or belief. Our interest in this particular question is in having a constitution in this country where there is no in-built privilege in favour of or disadvantage against anyone on grounds of their religion or belief.

BHA reports as does PoliticsReligion.eu about the Monday 28 November 2011 JOINT COMMITTEE ON THE DRAFT HOUSE OF LORDS REFORM BILL at which the Archbishop of Canterbury and Andrew Copson from BHA gave evidence.

BHA Strategy now includes 'science' & 'scientific evidence' in line with H4S recommendations.

Between December 2010 to February 2011, Humanists4Science (H4S) committee members (David Flint (Chair), Josh Kutchinsky, David McKnight, Dr Tom Rees, Andy Pepperdine (Treasurer), Chris Street)  had extensive online discussions about the lack of any reference to 'science' and 'scientific method' in the BHA Strategy (October 2010). 

On February 1st 2011 Chris Street was appointed H4S Chair by the H4S Committee.

On 18th February 2011, Chris Street wrote a letter to Andrew Copson (Chief Executive, British Humanist Association), on behalf of a majority of the H4S committee. The letter said that 'Humanists4Science find it extraordinary that 'science' finds no place in BHA Strategy 2010'. 

H4S recommended  that BHA:-

• 1) include 'science' in BHA Vision.
• 2) include in BHA Aim “humanists understand that reason and scientific method provide the best ways to understand the universe“ 
• 3) include in BHA Aim 'public understanding of science' and 'scientific method' 

The 18th February letter said:- 

Dear Andrew, 

Further to our telecom this morning, as Chair of BHA Affiliate group Humanists4Science, I am writing to seek improvements in the BHA Strategy 2010. 

BHA supports science & scientific thinking by campaigning about science, organising public lectures on science and consulting with the scientific community. For instance, BHA organises the annual Darwin Day lecture, campaigns to make Darwin Day a public holiday and responds to guidance about homeopathic products. 

As a full member of International Humanist Ethical Union, BHA presumably endorses IHEU strategy (1 - IHEU Strategy & Aims http://www.iheu.org/node/1531) to promote the IHEU Amsterdam Declaration 2002 on Humanism, the official defining statement of World Humanism. In this declaration, science / scientific method are cited six times (NB philosophy doesn't get a mention) (2). See Note A: - 

In the Amsterdam Declaration 2002 science/scientific method is mentioned six times, "Humanism is the outcome of a long tradition of free thought that has inspired many of the world's great thinkers and creative artists and gave rise to science itself". A "fundamental of modern Humanism" is that "Humanism is rational. It seeks to use science creatively, not destructively." … "Humanism advocates the application of the methods of science and free inquiry to the problems of human welfare. But Humanists also believe that the application of science and technology must be tempered by human values. Science gives us the means but human values must propose the ends." The Amsterdam Declaration concludes that "By utilising free inquiry, the power of science and creative imagination for the furtherance of peace and in the service of compassion, we have confidence that we have the means to solve the problems that confront us all. 

Whilst we understand that many special interest groups ask to get a mention, Humanists4Science find it extraordinary that science finds no place in BHA Strategy 2010. 

'Humanists4Science have 3 recommendations to give the BHA a renewed sense of purpose and vigour in explaining the important role of science in humanist thought:-

Recommendation 1 - Include science in BHA Vision 

Humanists can lead more fulfilling lives by an appreciation of scientific findings about the natural world. In making important decisions, knowledge about the scientific method can give Humanists a powerful tool to understand what evidence is likely to be most reliable. 

Humanists4Science recommend that BHA include the word 'science' in: "What do we want? (The "Vision") - We want a world where everyone lives cooperatively on the basis of shared human values and respect for human rights. We want non-religious people to be confident in living ethical and fulfilling lives on the basis of reason, science and humanity.

Recommendation 2 - Include science in an 'Our Aim' 

Humanists4Science recommend BHA Strategy includes an 'Our Aim' which mentions science. 

We suggest BHA choose one of three aims (or a combination of these aims): 

Our Aim (option 1) "To help humanists understand that reason and scientific method provide the best ways to understand the universe" (See Note 3 - Humanists4Science February 2011 discussions http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Humanists4ScienceManagement/)

.

Our Aim (option 2) "To help humanists understand that scientific and other evidence provides the best way to understand the universe" (Based on Note 4 - BHA Mori Poll 2007 http://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/poll.aspx?oItemId=190)

Our Aim (option 3) "To help humanists understand that the scientific method, though imperfect, is still the most reliable way of understanding the world." (Based on Note 5 - Humanist Manifesto 1980  http://www.secularhumanism.org/index.php?section=main&page=declaration#science)

Recommendation 3 - Promote science & scientific method 

Humanists4Science recommend a paragraph be included after any of the above 'Our Aims': "We will support initiatives to promote the public understanding of science and the scientific method by organising scientific lectures, campaigning about scientific issues and consulting with the scientific community." 

I attach a presentation incorporating these ideas (BHAStrategy2010-Humanists4Science-Final-comments.ppt) 

Thanks for considering Humanists4Science ideas about Humanism and Science. 

We look forward to our ideas being incorporated into BHA Strategy at the earliest opportunity. 

Chris Street, 

Chair Humanists4Science

On 9th November 2011 Andrew Copson wrote to Chris Street & others saying that the BHA Strategy (November 2011) had been reviewed.

Dear All,

You are receiving this email because you gave feedback on the BHA strategy adopted by the Board of Trustees at the end of 2010. The strategy that was then adopted is intended to remain constant over at least a five year period but the Board decided to review it after one year in light of its novelty. They have now done so.

The various comments received were considered by the Board, which made some changes to the strategy in light of them. I am attaching the final strategy document adopted by the Board. I am sorry if your particular change was not made, but am sure you will understand the large number of often competing responses which were received made that impossible and agree that the final document is an excellent strategy for the BHA.

Best wishes, Andrew


The BHA Strategy (November 2011) ppt file, for the first time, now includes an Aim about 'science' & 'scientific evidence' viz.:-

'humanists strive to be rational, looking to science in attempting to understand the universe'

and

'We will give philosophical and practical support to significant initiatives to meet global challenges, showing how these initiatives rest on our principles of accepting scientific evidence'

 

This is in line with H4S Recommendation 2, Option 1 (18th February 2011 letter) for BHA Aim:-

'To help humanists understand that reason and scientific method provide the best ways to understand the universe'

However... H4S Recommendation 1 to include 'science' in the BHA Vision was not included in the BHA Strategy (November 2011) viz: 

'Humanists can lead more fulfilling lives by an appreciation of scientific findings about the natural world. In making important decisions, knowledge about the scientific method can give Humanists a powerful tool to understand what evidence is likely to be most reliable. Humanists4Science recommend that BHA include the word 'science' in: 

"What do we want? (The "Vision") 

We want a world where everyone lives cooperatively on the basis of shared human values and respect for human rights. We want non-religious people to be confident in living ethical and fulfilling lives on the basis of reason, science and humanity.

Moreover ... H4S Recommendation 3 to include references to 'public understanding of science' and 'scientific method', in BHA Aims, was not included in the BHA Strategy (November 2011) viz:

"We will support initiatives to promote the public understanding of science and the scientific method by organising scientific lectures, campaigning about scientific issues and consulting with the scientific community." 

*******


Maybe these issues will be discussed again in 2015 when the BHA Strategy is reviewed.

What is metaphysical naturalism & methodological naturalism?

Dan Dennett talks about naturalism and methodological naturalism in debating John Haught. What's the distinction between these terms? And what is metaphysical naturalism? 


Wikipedia entry on Naturalism uses the Oxford English Dictionary definition:-

'Naturalism commonly refers to the philosophical viewpoint that the natural universe and its natural laws and forces (as opposed to supernatural ones) operate in the universe, and that nothing exists beyond the natural universe or, if it does, it does not affect the natural universe that we know.^[1]'

Metaphysical naturalism (aka ontological or philosophical naturalism) is defined by humanist Paul Kurtz  says ^[2] :-

1) nature is best accounted for by reference to material principles eg mass, energy, and other physical and chemical properties. 

2) Metaphysical naturalism holds that spirits, deities, and ghosts are not real.  

3) there is no "purpose" in nature.

Wikipedia describes the distinction between metaphysical & methodological naturalism:-

Metaphysical naturalism holds that there is nothing but natural elements, principles, and relations of the kind studied by the natural sciences, i.e., those required to understand our physical environment by mathematical modeling. Methodological naturalism, on the other hand, refers exclusively to the methodology of science, for which metaphysical naturalism provides only one possible ontological foundation (Ontology is a part of metaphysics asking questions concerning what entities exist or can be said to exist). Metaphysical naturalism holds that all properties related to consciousness and the mind are reducible to nature. The corresponding theological perspective is religious naturalism or spiritual naturalism. Metaphysical naturalism rejects the supernatural concepts and explanations that are part of many religions.

Methodological Naturalism says nothing about God's existence according to Paul de Vries of Wheaton college (a conservative evangelical school):-

In 1983 Paul de Vries distinguished between "methodological naturalism," a disciplinary method that says nothing about God's existence, and "metaphysical naturalism," which "denies the existence of a transcendent God."^[6]  

The Panda's Thumb discusses the origins of Methodological Naturalism - the idea may date back to Darwin or even Galileo.

Methodological naturalism is a 'ground rule' of science & the scientific method:-

In 1996, Robert T. Pennock used the term methodological naturalism to clarify that the scientific method confines itself to natural explanations without assuming the existence or non-existence of the supernatural, and is not based on dogmatic metaphysical naturalism as claimed by creationists and proponents of intelligent design. Pennock's testimony^[8] at the Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District trial was cited by the Judge who concluded that "Methodological naturalism is a "ground rule" of science today"^[9]

 Methodological naturalism, the ground rule of science, & nature:-

Methodological naturalism is concerned not with claims about what exists (= metaphysical naturalism) but with methods of learning what is nature. It is strictly the idea that all scientific endeavors—all hypotheses and events—are to be explained and tested by reference to natural causes and events. The genesis of nature, e.g., by an act of God, is not addressed. Methodological naturalism (cf. metaphysical naturalism) seeks only to provide a framework within which to conduct the scientific study of the laws of nature. Methodological naturalism is a way of acquiring knowledge. "since the scientific revolution of the 16th and 17th centuries, science has been limited to the search for natural causes to explain natural phenomena.... While supernatural explanations may be important and have merit, they are not part of science." Methodological naturalism is thus "a self-imposed convention of science." It is a "ground rule" that "requires scientists to seek explanations in the world around us based upon what we can observe, test, replicate, and verify."[12]