Jeffrey Thayne Even if you can invent a purely mechanistic account of why you raise your hand to ask a question in a biology class, that account will never provide the complete picture. Let’s imagine, for a moment, that you… [click to read more]
Nathan Richardson Down syndrome does not cause a learning disability. If you don’t believe me, keep reading. Once upon a time, there was a scientist who studied children and their biological and cognitive development. He met all kinds of children… [click to read more]
Nathan Richardson What do arguments against intelligent design have to do with psychology? I’ll level with you—this post isn’t really about Intelligent Design (ID). It’s about the philosophy of science, and what rejecting Intelligent Design as a science implies about… [click to read more]
Jeffrey Thayne Hammer and screw. A tool is much more effective when you know how to use it right, including its limitations. In my previous two posts, I explained how experimentation can never verify or falsify scientific theories. Does this… [click to read more]
Jeffrey Thayne In my previous post, I explained how experimentation is essentially a kind of logical argument. Based upon this assumption, I demonstrated how experimentation alone could never indubitably prove a hypothesis true, because whenever we conclude that our theory… [click to read more]
Jeffrey Thayne There are many different uses of the term secular. Gawain Wells and Wesley Burr, for example, explain that “secularism is the belief that the answers to life are found through rational means—through the concrete, observable, and practical world… [click to read more]
Nathan Richardson In a previous post, “Your Spiritual Nose,” I suggested that people too often dismiss the spiritual senses as being less reliable than our physical senses. Some object that spiritual senses are often misperceived or misinterpreted, to which I… [click to read more]
Jeffrey Thayne In my previous post, I explained how experimentation is essentially a kind of logical argument. Based upon this assumption, I demonstrated how experimentation alone could never indubitably prove a hypothesis true, because whenever we conclude that our theory… [click to read more]
Nathan Richardson Down syndrome does not cause a learning disability. If you don’t believe me, keep reading. Once upon a time, there was a scientist who studied children and their biological and cognitive development. He met all kinds of children… [click to read more]
We live in a very different intellectual climate than those who wrote the scriptures. Our philosophy and our academic climate was inherited to us from the Greeks; even our concept of truth “originates primarily where a lot of Western intellectual… [click to read more]
Jeffrey Thayne This post may seem a little basic, but I believe that there are two terms that, if understood properly, may greatly help us understand how the doctrines of the Restoration may compare with the philosophies of the world…. [click to read more]
Nathan Richardson What do arguments against intelligent design have to do with psychology? I’ll level with you—this post isn’t really about Intelligent Design (ID). It’s about the philosophy of science, and what rejecting Intelligent Design as a science implies about… [click to read more]
We live in a very different intellectual climate than those who wrote the scriptures. Our philosophy and our academic climate was inherited to us from the Greeks; even our concept of truth “originates primarily where a lot of Western intellectual… [click to read more]
Jeffrey Thayne Physicists have noticed that things accelerate at a particular rate when falling towards the earth. After extensive observation, they discovered that the acceleration of falling objects could be generalized and approximated by this particular mathematical equation: M represents… [click to read more]
Jeffrey Thayne Hammer and screw. A tool is much more effective when you know how to use it right, including its limitations. In my previous two posts, I explained how experimentation can never verify or falsify scientific theories. Does this… [click to read more]
Jeffrey Thayne Even if you can invent a purely mechanistic account of why you raise your hand to ask a question in a biology class, that account will never provide the complete picture. Let’s imagine, for a moment, that you… [click to read more]
Nathan Richardson Down syndrome does not cause a learning disability. If you don’t believe me, keep reading. Once upon a time, there was a scientist who studied children and their biological and cognitive development. He met all kinds of children… [click to read more]
Nathan Richardson What do arguments against intelligent design have to do with psychology? I’ll level with you—this post isn’t really about Intelligent Design (ID). It’s about the philosophy of science, and what rejecting Intelligent Design as a science implies about… [click to read more]
Jeffrey Thayne Hammer and screw. A tool is much more effective when you know how to use it right, including its limitations. In my previous two posts, I explained how experimentation can never verify or falsify scientific theories. Does this… [click to read more]
Jeffrey Thayne In my previous post, I explained how experimentation is essentially a kind of logical argument. Based upon this assumption, I demonstrated how experimentation alone could never indubitably prove a hypothesis true, because whenever we conclude that our theory… [click to read more]
Jeffrey Thayne There are many different uses of the term secular. Gawain Wells and Wesley Burr, for example, explain that “secularism is the belief that the answers to life are found through rational means—through the concrete, observable, and practical world… [click to read more]
Nathan Richardson In a previous post, “Your Spiritual Nose,” I suggested that people too often dismiss the spiritual senses as being less reliable than our physical senses. Some object that spiritual senses are often misperceived or misinterpreted, to which I… [click to read more]
Jeffrey Thayne In my previous post, I explained how experimentation is essentially a kind of logical argument. Based upon this assumption, I demonstrated how experimentation alone could never indubitably prove a hypothesis true, because whenever we conclude that our theory… [click to read more]
Nathan Richardson Down syndrome does not cause a learning disability. If you don’t believe me, keep reading. Once upon a time, there was a scientist who studied children and their biological and cognitive development. He met all kinds of children… [click to read more]
We live in a very different intellectual climate than those who wrote the scriptures. Our philosophy and our academic climate was inherited to us from the Greeks; even our concept of truth “originates primarily where a lot of Western intellectual… [click to read more]
Jeffrey Thayne This post may seem a little basic, but I believe that there are two terms that, if understood properly, may greatly help us understand how the doctrines of the Restoration may compare with the philosophies of the world…. [click to read more]
Nathan Richardson What do arguments against intelligent design have to do with psychology? I’ll level with you—this post isn’t really about Intelligent Design (ID). It’s about the philosophy of science, and what rejecting Intelligent Design as a science implies about… [click to read more]
We live in a very different intellectual climate than those who wrote the scriptures. Our philosophy and our academic climate was inherited to us from the Greeks; even our concept of truth “originates primarily where a lot of Western intellectual… [click to read more]
Jeffrey Thayne Physicists have noticed that things accelerate at a particular rate when falling towards the earth. After extensive observation, they discovered that the acceleration of falling objects could be generalized and approximated by this particular mathematical equation: M represents… [click to read more]
Jeffrey Thayne Hammer and screw. A tool is much more effective when you know how to use it right, including its limitations. In my previous two posts, I explained how experimentation can never verify or falsify scientific theories. Does this… [click to read more]
