> > Jason wrote > > > > 'Quantum field', 'Scientific principles' and > > mathematical principles are in fact, abstract, > > intangible aspects of nature. > > > > You are correct in saying that there is a worthwhile > > difference, between 'materialism' and 'naturalism'. > > > > --- "compost1uk" <compost1uk@> wrote: > > Which means that the so-called "intangible" is "real", no? > Perhaps *very* real? Perhaps even *more* real than some > tangible stuff, such as a doorstop - against which you can > certainly stub your toe. This is a funny concept to the > modern (nominalistic) mind. But the Ancients would have > had no trouble with it at all. > > http://www.dunelm-mill.com/shop/rugs/doorstops/ <http://www.dunelm-mill.com/shop/rugs/doorstops/> >
There are clear, distinct, differences between 'materialism' 'naturalism' and 'reductionism'. Nagel probably uses these terms interchangably and with some ambiguity. 'Materialism' is a much more generic term and is used as an opposite to 'spiritualism'. 'Naturalism' and 'Reductionism' are more specific terms, relating to the methodology of Science. > > > > After a carefull study of evolution, you will notice > > > > that evolution is partially deterministic and > > > > partially random. > > > > > > > > There seems to be a deterministic pattern, and yet > > > > within that deterministic pattern a lot of > > > > randomness plays out. > > > > > > > > The analogy given is that of a football game, where > > > > there is a broad set of rules and yet every player > > > > can express his creativity in his own unique way. > > > > > > > > Researchers state that 50,000 basic organic > > > > molecules, each can combine with each other in > > > > thousands of different ways. So there are thousands > > > > of different ways to create life. Thus the chances > > > > of life forming is quite probable. > > > > > > > > A lot of Scientists now also say that "the emergence > > > > of life might be a natural consequence of the laws > > > > of physics, and the laws of chemistry." > > > >
