What Does Metaphysical Naturalism Entail?

Metaphysical naturalism posits that everything falls under the umbrella of the natural. The term "natural," however, is frequently ambiguous, generally implying alignment with the natural sciences. Regardless of the specific argument presented by naturalists, there is an inevitable transition from empirical science to philosophical reasoning. The successful application of scientific methods is often misconstrued as evidence supporting a metaphysical stance.

The first video, "Naturalistic Fallacy," delves into the philosophical underpinnings of naturalism, illustrating how scientific success is often equated with philosophical truth.

The Implications of Metaphysical Naturalism

If metaphysical naturalism holds true, it implies the non-existence of God, the soul, and an afterlife—claims that significantly influence our understanding of purpose and destiny. The truth of these assertions is crucial to human existence.

We frequently hear that science has yet to uncover any supernatural elements—no deities, souls, or mythical beings that fall outside the parameters of physics. Such assertions extend beyond merely stating that science effectively reveals truths about the natural world; they assert that the natural world is the entirety of existence. The absence of evidence for entities like God or souls is taken to mean that such entities do not exist.

While it is accurate to claim that science has not identified these phenomena, it is equally true that science was not designed to seek them out. The scientific method deliberately omits certain phenomena from its investigations, focusing solely on what can be measured and objectively evaluated.

The Triumph of the Scientific Method

The naturalistic scientific approach has achieved remarkable success. Yet, in their enthusiasm, some individuals advocate for extending this method to explain all aspects of existence. This transition from appreciating a method to making a philosophical assertion is significant.

This philosophical stance is referred to by several terms—naturalism, physicalism, and materialism—all of which suggest that only what is revealed through natural sciences is real. Materialism claims that only matter exists, physicalism asserts that only physical entities are real, and naturalism broadly states that everything is natural.

These viewpoints leverage the prestige of science to bolster their philosophical claims, misleadingly implying that scientific achievements validate metaphysical naturalism. The term "naturalism" is often used interchangeably to refer to both scientific methodology and philosophical doctrine. Initially, we are presented with the undeniable triumphs of natural sciences, followed by a seamless transition to philosophical assertions.

For instance, notable atheist Richard Dawkins states:

“The universe that we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but pitiless indifference.”

This is a philosophical assertion claiming that the universe lacks purpose and sentience. However, one must consider who is making this observation. His claim holds true only if "we" refers exclusively to science, relegating the scientific perspective as the sole means of understanding the world.

Examining Our Perception of Reality

In everyday language, “we” typically refers to humans. However, when "we" includes beings with sensory perception, the properties we observe are vastly different. We perceive a world rich with color, taste, sound, and aroma—its beauty can be overwhelming.

We often experience awe and wonder at the diversity and movement of nature. Rather than viewing the world as indifferent, we see how it meets our needs and even provides for our enjoyment. Those who have deeply engaged with nature do not emerge with the nihilistic perspective that Dawkins describes. His portrayal resonates more with the mindset of someone facing a profound existential crisis.

It is only from a strictly scientific lens that his description holds validity. The scientific method deliberately excludes subjective characteristics from its narratives. The absence of empirical evidence for concepts such as good and evil or purpose and indifference does not necessarily imply that the universe is devoid of these qualities.

Even as we discern the distinction between methodological naturalism and metaphysical naturalism, we must still evaluate the coherence of the latter. The efficacy of the scientific method is widely acknowledged; however, we must also consider the validity of the philosophical claim that everything is natural.

Assessing the Truth of Metaphysical Naturalism

To determine the truth of the assertion that everything is natural, we must first clarify what "natural" actually means. What qualifies as natural? The attempts to define naturalism consistently fall short, leading to the conclusion that naturalism is either incorrect or devoid of meaning.

Hempel’s Dilemma, articulated by philosopher Carl Hempel, encapsulates this issue. Naturalists face two choices: if they define natural based on current physics, naturalism is inaccurate since current physics is acknowledged to be incomplete, leaving mental phenomena outside its scope. Alternatively, if natural is defined by an ideal future physics, naturalism becomes vacuous, as no one knows what that future entails. The potential inclusion of souls, gods, or mythical beings renders naturalism meaningless, as even the naturalists themselves struggle to define what "natural" truly signifies.

This dilemma would not seem as pressing if naturalism were presented as a tentative belief or a modest proposal. However, it is often conveyed with such conviction that dissenters are labeled as science deniers or irrational dreamers.

Metaphysical Naturalism: A Supernatural Assertion

Naturalism asserts a grand ontological thesis regarding the entirety of existence without being able to even define its principal term. This is because naturalism does not originate from an empirical observation of the world, followed by a logical framework to explain those observations. Instead, it begins with a specific investigative method and attempts to mold reality to fit this predetermined approach.

Naturalism makes claims that cannot be substantiated through either scientific inquiry or logical reasoning. It extends beyond its own conceptual confines to assert a view of reality that is extra-natural. Its inability to define itself stems from the notion that "nature" does not constitute a coherent category of existence; it is merely an arbitrary designation based on a chosen method of inquiry.

In essence, naturalism misappropriates the esteemed explanatory power of science, applying it to its metaphysical claims without adequate justification.