In this episode, hosts Angus Menuge and Robert J. Marks conclude their three-part discussion with Dr. Robert Larmer about his chapter on methodological naturalism in the recent volume Minding the Brain. The trio argue that methodological naturalism is not the only viable approach in scientific inquiry and that it can be an obstruction to discovering the truth. They suggest that explanations should be based on how well they explain rather than being prescribed in advance. They also criticize the assumption that science requires the adoption of methodological naturalism, which guarantees that non-physical causes can never be recognized. Dr. Larmer proposes an alternative approach called methodological pluralism, which allows for a more open-minded and evidence-based exploration of different causes. He concludes that methodological naturalism is unnecessary and can hinder scientific progress.

Additional Resources

• This is Part 3 of a three-episode interview. Listen to Part 1 and Part 2
• Minding the Brain: Models of the Mind, Information, and Empirical Science
• Dr. Robert Larmer at robertlarmer.com