I get email

On a forum I visit, I wrote that I consider Methodological Naturalism (MN) ¹ to be synonymous with the scientific method. I received a series of emails from a concerned citizen. Here is the most recent:

Hello again David, Just noticed this came after what I wrote to you last month: "I view MN and 'the scientific method' as synonymous." 

Pity. It just means your work in science, philosophy, theology/worldview discourse will be largely irrelevant, as it is ideologically compromised and outdated. 

Most millennial undergrad philosophy students, and surely anyone who has taken a course or read a book or even article in science studies or philosophy of science, would simply ignore your claim because it is not sustainable or coherent. It makes me wonder why an evangelical Christian would try to foist it upon his brothers and sisters as if ideological science were a good thing. 

The answer you gave is the same and only one that atheist physicists seem to give. Why is that? Are you going to continue to give the same answer as the atheists, using their ideology as your own, David? 

I have spoken with devout religious physicists who have done enough work in philosophy of science to know what you haven't learned yet. Literally, David, they ALL reject methodological naturalism as an unnecessary ideology. And they're not just physicists, like you, but also theologians!

I wrote back that I appreciated his concern, but I have already long ago resigned myself to the fact that my science, philosophy, and theology are largely irrelevant, so no need to worry!

---

¹Methodological Naturalism  (MN) essentially states that everything we learn about the natural world we learn through science. On the other hand there is Philosophical Naturalism (PN), which I deny, which states that the supernatural does not exist. There are two very different beasts. MN is good. PN is bad.