The Scientific Method Is Based Upon a Logic Error
When it comes to the Philosophy of Science, Science, Personality Theory, Psychology, and the Scientific Method, I discovered that studying and learning the difference between affirming the consequent and negating the consequent is the most interesting and most powerful concept that one can study and learn about. It’s the concept that paid the most dividends in the end.
All of the Psychologists and Personality Theorists turn to Joseph Rychlak for this information because he pioneered Humanism, and he was twice a president of the APA’s division of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology.
Materialism and Naturalism are so obviously false, that it takes nearly an infinite amount of blind-faith and ignorance in order to believe in them. I KNOW because I used to be a Materialist, Naturalist, Nihilist, and Atheist. These things are based upon a refusal to look at evidence. Anything that falsifies Materialism and Naturalism is deliberately rejected, ridiculed, eliminated, ignored, and even destroyed. Naturalism is head-in-the-sand science.
Science is Observation and Experience, or it should be.
Buhlman, William L. (1996). Adventures Beyond the Body: How to Experience Out-of-Body Travel. New York: HarperCollins.
This book was the first book to convince me that Materialism and Naturalism are false. This book contains scientific evidence – observations and experiences – that falsify Materialism and Naturalism. In other words, this scientific evidence or experiential evidence or observational evidence proves that Materialism, Naturalism, and Nihilism are false.
Materialism is a denial of the Quantum Non-Local, the Non-Physical, or the Spiritual. Naturalism is a denial of the Supernatural or the Quantum. Nihilism is a denial of an afterlife and spirit world. Atheism is a denial of the existence of God. All of these things deny the existence of Psyche, particularly God’s Psyche. These pseudo-sciences are Denialisms. They are philosophy, metaphysics, religion, and dogma – NOT science. Many Scientists fail to realize that Denialism of any kind is the ultimate worst and most limiting philosophical foundation upon which to base a scientific discipline; yet, Materialism, Naturalism, Radical Behaviorism, and Atheism are based exclusively upon denial and a refusal to look at any contradictory evidence. That’s the very definition of Bad Science.
Furthermore, the Darwinists, Materialists, and Naturalists have chosen to believe that physical matter, entropy, or the rocks designed and programmed the first functional genomes on this planet and designed, created, and manufactured the first life forms on this planet. That claim is patently illogical because we ALL KNOW from observation and personal experience that the rocks and entropy cannot design and create anything at all, let alone a fully functional genome or fully functional life form.
There are Scientists, Darwinists, Materialists, Naturalists, and Atheists who worship the Scientific Method and consider it infallible. This practice is called Scientism. I was a practitioner of Scientism. We treat the Scientific Method as if it were God; and, these people make the claim that the ONLY way to find and know the truth is through the Scientific Method. Because of their biases and prejudices and personal desires, these people are completely oblivious to the fact that their Personal Religion or Scientism or Denialism is based upon a serious logic fallacy which is called “affirming the consequent”. There are PhD Scientists who have never heard of “affirming the consequent”, yet they are doing it every single day of their lives. The Scientific Method and Traditional Science are based upon “affirming the consequent”, which is a logic fallacy.
Affirming the consequent is a type of logic error which occurs when we uncritically accept as affirmed or confirmed the results of an “if-then” sequence of reasoning or scientific exploration. Affirming the consequent is begging the question or jumping to conclusions. Begging the question is using your pre-chosen conclusion as one of your premises. These different logic fallacies use one’s pre-chosen conclusion as premises and as evidentiary proof that one’s pre-chosen conclusion is true – that’s called “begging the question” and “affirming the consequent”; and, it is a logic fallacy. People have been doing this for millennia; and, it produces falsehoods and lies such as Materialism, Naturalism, and Darwinism every time that it is used.
Affirming the consequent or begging the question is the logic fallacy upon which Traditional Science, the Scientific Method, Materialism, Naturalism, Darwinism, Nihilism, Behaviorism, Determinism, Physical Reductionism, and Atheism are based.
Philosophy of Science research into affirming the consequent teaches us that for every piece of scientific data or scientific evidence that we develop, there are theoretically an infinite number of different possible interpretations that can be given to that single piece of scientific evidence. Many of them seem plausible, but only one of them can be right and true.
This is why philosophers are wont to point out that for any given fact pattern which can be demonstrated or “discovered” empirically, an infinite number of theoretical explanations are possible. This is also why we say theories remain theories, even after they have been validated. All validating evidence can establish convincingly is the negation of a theoretical proposition. Having postulated an ‘If A, then B’ sequence, when our researches fail to confirm this sequence, we can logically reject the theoretical relation originally postulated. Now this situation bothers philosophers. A datum accrued is not always knowledge gained, because sometimes genuine understanding is lacking. One can have a great deal of information and still suffer for lack of knowledge. (Rychlak, 1981, A Philosophy of Science for Personality Theory, pp. 81-82).
Imagine it! There are an infinite number of possible explanations for every piece of validated scientific evidence or scientific data that we generate. Picking the explanation or interpretation you like the most and treating it as the God-given truth IS “affirming the consequent” or “affirming your chosen conclusion”. Traditional Science and the Scientific Method are based upon affirming the consequent. People can have a ton of scientific data and still suffer from a complete lack of truth. Darwinists have mountains of evidence that’s been generated by the Scientific Methods; but, these people completely lack knowledge and truth because their Major Premises are false.
Do you fully understand what this truly means? It means that the Scientific Method is philosophically flawed at its very fundamental core. The thing that millions of Scientists have placed all of their faith into, the Scientific Method, has a logic error built into it as an integral part of it.
How’s this possible?
It’s made possible by ignorance. It’s made possible by the fact that every science experiment, every piece of scientific evidence, every scientific research project, every scientific conclusion, and every piece of scientific datum requires an interpretation or an explanation or a chosen consequent from a fallible human being. Interpretation, scientific inference, or a best-guess from a human being is the fourth step, a crucial step, but a fallible step in the Scientific Method. For each piece of scientific data produced by the Scientific Method there are literally an infinite number of possible theoretical explanations that can be applied to that scientific evidence. Only God knows which one of them is the truth or which one of them is right.
That’s the flaw of Materialism, Naturalism, and Darwinism. These people have a ton of scientific evidence or physical evidence supporting their claim that only physical matter exists, but they still lack knowledge of the truth because they have chosen a false interpretation and a false premise for all of their scientific arguments.
The Scientific Method typically runs through the following sequence in an attempt to arrive at the truth.
1) Form a HYPOTHESIS.
2) Select a Scientific Method or Scientific Methodology to TEST the hypothesis.
3) Run the Science Experiment; and then, Observe and Measure the RESULTS.
4) Find the BEST INTERPRETATION or the BEST EXPLANATION for the Scientific Data, the Scientific Evidence, the Scientific Observations, and the RESULTS of the Science Experiment.
This is the Scientific Method in action!
The logic error, often the fatal error, of any scientific hypothesis takes place in the fourth and final step when a human being is called upon to interpret and explain the results of the science experiment to the rest of us. I have observed that Materialism always provides a false interpretation, an impossible interpretation (Creation by Rocks or Creation by Physical Matter or Creation by Entropy), to every piece of scientific evidence that it is applied to. Creation by Rocks or Spontaneous Generation is physically impossible. It’s prevented from happening by entropy or the second law of thermodynamics. Science itself falsifies the Theory of Evolution. Entropy prevents the Theory of Evolution from becoming true.
Materialism or Naturalism as a scientific explanation always produces a false interpretation of scientific data, especially the closer our scientific experiment and scientific data come to formal cause, final cause, and ultimate cause. Materialism and Naturalism cannot explain formal cause, final cause, and ultimate cause in a way that makes logical sense. For every piece of scientific evidence that the Darwinists produce, there are an infinite number of different interpretations which can be given to each piece of evidence; and, Creation by Rocks or Materialism is one of the worst possible interpretations that can be given to scientific evidence because Science as a whole has proven Creation by Rocks, Spontaneous Generation, Abiogenesis, or Materialism false.
There are infinitely better explanations for scientific evidence than Creation by Rocks or Creation by Mutation/Selection, because physical processes and physical matter cannot design and create. Physical matter and physical processes cannot do science, cannot do manufacturing, cannot do formal cause or design, cannot do final cause or teleological meaning and desiring, and cannot do thinking, consciousness, psyche, and ultimate cause.
Do you know what else this means?
Due to this inbuilt logic fallacy, “affirming the consequent”, it means that the Scientific Method, technically, cannot be used to prove the truth or to prove a hypothesis true. The Scientific Method can only be used to prove a hypothesis false. For example, I submit the whole of Science or Observation, as proof that Materialism and Naturalism (Creation by Rocks or Creation by Entropy) is impossible and false. Darwinism is just another form of Materialism or Creation by Rocks. In other words, Darwinism or the Theory of Evolution reduces to Creation by Rocks or Creation by Entropy. I submit the whole of Science and Observation, particularly Quantum Mechanics or Spiritual Mechanics or Supernatural Mechanics, as proof that Materialism, Darwinism, and Creation by Rocks is impossible and false. That’s making good use of the Scientific Method, isn’t it?
The Scientific Method cannot be used to prove things true, but it can definitely be used to prove things false; and, the Scientific Method when properly understood and correctly employed proves beyond a shadow of a doubt in a thousand different ways that Materialism and its derivatives are false.
Remember that Materialism is the philosophical claim that the Quantum Non-Local or the Spiritual does not exist. All you really have to do is to find one immaterial non-physical thing in order to prove Materialism false; and, there are thousands of them – like dark matter, dark energy, quantum entanglement, quantum non-locality, action at a distance, the zero-point field of light, magnetism, light, thoughts, consciousness, spirit matter, forces, fields, time, space, and gravity to name only a few. Spirit is light, and light is spirit. There’s no way to prove the claims of Materialism true, but there are thousands of different ways to prove Materialism and Naturalism false.
Now, the following example is how “affirming the consequent” plays out for real within the scientific disciplines in which many people have placed all of their faith. We see this taking place every single day in popular media and never once do they question it.
We can each look out upon this world and observe that there are fully functional genomes and fully functional life forms present. Their existence is undeniable. So, what is the result? The Materialists, Naturalists, Darwinists, and Atheists go on the television, show us all this life around us, and then say, “Look what Evolution has created”, or “Look what Evolution can do”, or “Look what Evolution has done for us”! That’s “affirming the consequent”. That’s “begging the question”. These people take the whole of scientific research, all of the scientific data, the whole of empirical observation, and the existence of life itself as PROOF that the Theory of Evolution is true and as PROOF that Evolution designed, programmed, engineered, created, and manufactured ALL of the genomes and ALL of the life forms on this planet. That is “affirming the consequent”. It’s also “begging the question” and “jumping to conclusions”, which are also egregious logic fallacies.
In other words, these people apply the interpretation that they personally like the most to the scientific evidence that they have on hand, never once realizing that there are better and more logical explanations of the scientific evidence than the one they are choosing to provide to us. That’s “affirming the consequent” and “confirmation bias” in action; and, it happens every time one of the Darwinists or Atheists tells us that the Theory of Evolution has been proven true by the Scientific Method. These people never realize that the Theory of Evolution IS Design by Rocks and Creation by Rocks, nor do they realize that they are trying to get us to believe that Creation by Rocks or Creation by Entropy is the best possible interpretation for their scientific evidence and the best possible explanation for the origin of life on this planet.
These people have chosen the conclusion or chosen the consequent that they personally like the most and have affirmed or have chosen to believe that their personal interpretation of the scientific evidence is real and true. They have “affirmed the consequent”, affirmed Creation by Rocks, affirmed Creation by Entropy without even realizing that that is what they have done. Then they base complete Science Disciplines and their whole scientific career upon their initial faulty assumption or faulty interpretation of the scientific evidence, never once realizing that there are better interpretations of the scientific evidence than the one they have chosen to believe in. After all, when thought about logically, impartially, and without preconceived biases, Materialism or Creation by Rocks or Creation by Entropy comes across as being dumber than rocks.
That’s why Richard Dawkins has lost every one of his public debates, even though he truly believes that he won them all. He is unable to see and understand that he has been “affirming the consequent” all of his life. He has taken every piece of scientific evidence he has ever seen and used it all as proof that his chosen interpretation or chosen conclusion is true, even though his chosen consequent (Creation by Rocks or the Theory of Evolution) is demonstrably and logically false. Dawkins and the other Atheists have a great deal of information and scientific evidence at their fingertips, but NONE of it proves that physical matter or entropy can design and create anything that it sets its mind to. In fact, the scientific evidence and logical common sense proves exactly the opposite, namely that the rocks can’t design and create anything at all and that spontaneous generation is false. Richard Dawkins has a great deal of information, but still suffers from a lack of knowledge and still suffers from a faulty interpretation and a faulty initial assumption (Creation by Rocks or Creation by Entropy). Garbage in, garbage out.
These people fail to realize that there are infinitely better interpretations and much more credible and believable explanations for their scientific evidence than the “Creation by Rocks” or “Creation by Entropy”, which they are trying to get us to believe and which they have personally chosen to believe in. Nor do these people realize that their scientific conclusions and scientific interpretations are based upon a logic fallacy that is called “affirming the consequent”. In other words, they have good and reliable scientific data but a horrible and false scientific interpretation or scientific conclusion. That’s the true nature of Darwinism, Materialism, and Naturalism. Even though these people might have good and reliable scientific data, their chosen interpretation of that scientific data – “Design and Creation by Rocks” – does not hold water. It’s demonstrably false and has in fact been falsified.
The rocks have never been caught in the act of design and creation. The rocks have never been caught in the act of spontaneous generation. Creation by Rocks or by Materialism or by Entropy is scientifically unsustainable and untenable, as well as being unrealistic and unbelievable.
These people can’t see nor understand this reality because they don’t want to see it or understand it. Their confirmation bias won’t allow them to see it or understand it. I couldn’t see it nor understand it when I was a Materialist and an Atheist, so I know from personal experience how it goes. Back in 2012, I didn’t even know what Materialism, Naturalism, and Nihilism meant even though I was a believer in these things at the time. However, after I decided to abandon My Materialism and My Atheism, I was finally open to the discovery of these truths; and since then, I have observed that the Materialists and Naturalists are fundamentally and philosophically wrong and don’t have a leg to stand on.
Materialism and Naturalism are the very definition of Bad Science, Bad Philosophy, Bad Interpretations, and Pseudo-Science. Materialism, Naturalism, Darwinism, and their derivatives are the prime example of affirming the consequent or jumping to conclusions. Once my eyes were opened, I realized that the whole of Science demonstrates soundly and conclusively that Materialism and Naturalism are based upon false assumptions and a faulty interpretation of the scientific evidence. Denialism of any kind is the ultimate worst foundation upon which to build a scientific discipline, worldview, personal religion, or philosophy of life.
Once I got rid of My Materialism and My Atheism – knew how they were falsified and why they are false – then I found myself looking for a better model of reality. I believe that I have finally found what I was looking for in the Ultimate Cause Model of Reality, even if I did have to create it for myself in order to have it.
Mark My Words
—
Source
The Ultimate Model of Reality: Psyche Is the Ultimate Cause