This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.


← Behe's Empty Box

Wosret's Avatar Jump to comment 24 by Wosret

It is never justified to call anything a supernatural evident. I think that Hume demonstrated this beautifully, and clearly. It presupposes a knowledge of nature that no one possesses. Without omniscience no one knows what isn't possible to occure by natural processes.

The very best we could say is, "that contradicts what we know about nature." if something that fitted that description were to occure, but of course the best explanation would be that our understanding of nature was wrong. Which is quite possible, since such knowledge is merely probabolistic, and fallable.

Sun, 15 Jun 2008 04:55:00 UTC | #183620