Creationist Phillip E. Johnson argues that evolution theory is a product of a bias toward naturalistic explanation—a materialist philosophical ideology that encroaches on empirical science. This position even got some support from philosopher Michael Ruse. But the fact is science must include a base level of presupposition; the creationist, while supplying her own, mistakenly thinks that science can operate without such an explanatory guide. This paper defends naturalism in science, thereby rejecting the concerns and arguments of neo-creationists. In this effort, the author argues why naturalism is important to science, uses Dewey to explain why anti-naturalism leads to careless science, and turns to Hume to expose some logical mistakes in the creationist position.
Winham, Hya P.
"What is 'Natural' About Natural Science: Philosophical Naturalism in the Evolution Debate,"
Episteme: Vol. 14
, Article 4.
Available at: http://digitalcommons.denison.edu/episteme/vol14/iss1/4