<!DOCTYPE html><html><head><title></title><style type="text/css">p.MsoNormal,p.MsoNoSpacing{margin:0}</style></head><body><div style="font-family:Arial;">“<i>Darwinism is not a testable scientific theory, but a metaphysical research program—a possible framework for testable scientific theories.</i>” <br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;"> Karl Popper.<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;"><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">I like this distinction but immediately wonder if it might provide some analytical / research means that could be applied to other "metaphysical research programs" — creationism for example, or the plethora of efforts, by scientists, to reconcile their faith with their science. Or, Newton's [and Jung's] (in)famous commitment to Egyptian Alchemy.<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;"><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">Would it be possible to use the Tao de Ching or the Diamond Sutra or Whitehead's Process Philosophy (not a random selection, I group the three intentionally) as a metaphysical research program and derive some interesting and useful science?<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;"><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">davew<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;"><br></div></body></html>