says, Science does not preclude magic, but you ... do not get a pass to include magic.
That is what I said, essentially.There is far more evidence to preclude magic from any natural process, and zero to support the hypothesis that magic exists.
Actually, no, there is zero evidence to preclude
"magic." Literally zero. Because even if you can have a hypothesis that shows how something could happen without "magic" -- even if you could explain all the forces we currently don't understand, and show how they all can happen through purely natural means -- there's still no evidence that there necessarily wasn't
a supernatural force at play in some way.
I think what you simply mean is that we have good theories that do not require "magic," and no good theories that require it (or even take it into serious consideration). And again, that is what I said, essentially. Science is about the natural, and the supernatural is literally outside what science is suitable for explaining.Declaring life and/or evolution a "supernatural" phenomena is a cop-out
No, in fact, it's not. I mean, it could be for some people, of course. But that's not meaningful. If you've studied it and come to that conclusion, how could it be a "cop-out"?
Frankly, calling it a "cop-out" is a cop-out.Any explanation that relies on the supernatural is, by definition, unscientific.
Yes, which is what I said. However, that is obviously an uninteresting claim, because not all valuable knowledge is scientific, nor is all truth scientifically explainable.
The most obvious example is the scientific method itself. The scientific method is absolutely outside of the realm of science, and firmly in the realm of epistemology and other branches of philosophy. We need to talk about Descartes and reliability of the senses and what is truly real, and the rational vs. the chaotic, and all this other stuff that science can inform
, but cannot seriously theorize about.
So the scientific method -- the reasons behind why we use it, and why we rely on it, and so on -- is, in fact, unscientific.Science relies on evidence and the supernatural explains without evidence.
No, that's not true, either. Science relies on physical evidence in the natural world. There's other types of evidence, such as philosophical argument (which, again, helps give us the scientific method itself).