Paul Vjecsner Comment

Sanford Aranoff says:
"The philosophical assumptions which underlie scientific inquiry..." Please! We must know what the words mean! What does God mean? Well to define something we have to show it relationship with other things. Since God existed prior to everything else, we cannot use anything to define God. Conclusion: God is a meaningless word.

What is science? A scientific theory is a mathematical framework (a collection of meaningful arbitrary consistent statements) combined with partial empirical verification. The author does not know what science is.

See Rational Thinking, Government Policies, Science, and Living. See the chapter on God.


Paul Vjecsner says:
As you may notice, Dr. Aranoff, I am the author of the book reviewed, and I want to challenge your what you consistently call rational thinking.

First, there is no connection made of your "know what the words mean! What does God mean?" with the reviewer's "philosophical assumptions which underlie scientific inquiry".

Second, your inference from "to define something we have to show it[sic] relationship with other things" to God as "a meaningless word" is quite a non-sequitur. One can define God by "other things" even if he "existed prior to everything else". In fact the prior existence can be made a defining attribute if one so wishes. A customary definition as omnipotent and omniscient is entirely possible.

Third, "what science is" is again a matter of definition, and they vary. And yours is hardly acceptable. That a "scientific theory is a mathematical framework" flies in the face of the widest understanding of science as concerning the natural world, knowledge of which is aided by applicable mathematics. Freud or Darwin, if considered scientists, did not build on mathematics.

In summary, you are in need of better understanding of definition, let alone logic.