Have you ever on this forum asked for the methodology for Philosophical Naturali

[jeremyp]

I did in reply 13. But beyond that, no, I haven't asked people for a methodology for a philosophical position - that would be odd. For two reasons, because it isn't a methodology, and I don't know that many philosophical naturalists - where I have seen them or wher I have seen posts taking the position I have challenged it

Thanks for your contribution.

When we've all answered no, what then?

I will ask ''why not?''

I thought we had agreed it's unfalsifiable.  Therefore, there would be little point.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I did in reply 13. But beyond that, no, I haven't asked people for a methodology for a philosophical position - that would be odd. For two reasons, because it isn't a methodology, and I don't know that many philosophical naturalists - where I have seen them or wher I have seen posts taking the position I have challenged it

Thanks for your contribution.

When we've all answered no, what then?

I will ask ''why not?''

I thought we had agreed it's unfalsifiable.  Therefore, there would be little point.

I suppose the next question is ''why you are all subcritical of it?''

[jeremyp]

I suppose the next question is ''why you are all subcritical of it?''

we are all saying Meh.

[Jack Knave]

There are times when one just has to help a Vlad out in a whole 'Brother, here's a dime' way.

The issue Vlad wants to flag here is that if one has a proper methodology for supernaturalism, one has to effectively demonstrate that philosophical naturalism is wrong, and by default some form of philosophical supernaturalism is true as well, even though that concept actually is not transferrable. The main issue is that to assert that there is a methodological supernaturalism, one has to defeat philosophical naturalism. In that he recognises his problem, but is lying about what he has been asked.

The main issue on this thread is to find out whether non theists have ever asked for a methodology
for philosophical naturalism.
If philosophical naturalism has a methodology then are it's definitions applicable to supernaturalism?
If it doesn't then what business does it have to stand poised to accuse supernaturalism of not having one and being the less for it?

One of your common faults is to not define the terms you use.

Supernaturalism doesn't exist because it is a meaningless term.