Mark Benoza

Ways of Knowing
11/22/14
NOMA Vs. Bayes
Scientific Testing of the Supernatural

In the world of science and supernatural there tends to be a blur between both subjects. The
two have a strong following with a continuous development, and also obtain a deeper knowledge as to
how our world is and works. Many have taken a stance as too if one another may correlate together in
harmony, or to question each other. In the essay Nonoverlapping Magisteria by Stephen Jay Gould,
we are brought with the opportunity and explanation as to why both of these subjects should coexist.
While using past experiences,self reflecting, and examples of religious figures, Gould makes the
argument that both of the topics may exist side-by-side due to the their Nonoverlapping Magisteria,
also known as NOMA. With NOMA the argument is made that because of the different realms that
both topics exist in, it is unreasonable to correlate them in the first place. While this maybe valid, other
views may disagree. In Yonatan I. Fishmans article Can Science test Supernatural worldviews
Fishman directly challenges Goulds NOMA claim. Fishman makes the argument by using the
definition of testability as a way for science to observe supernatural phenomenon. Both articles make
conflicting claims to the association of science and the supernatural. By analyzing each argument we
shall come to see why each author comes to opposite conclusions.
Again as mentioned, Gould makes the argument of the coexisting subjects by stating that the
both of them derive from separate realms. As he puts it We study how the heavens go, and they
determine how to go to heaven. Science tests the natural order of things, while the supernatural tests
the morality. Goulds main argument is in his use of the term NOMA. The phrase Non Overlapping
Magisteria originates from the word magisterium or teaching authority. Both science and the
supernatural (In Gould's essay considering religion as supernatural), contain their own teaching

authority. Past scientists, philosophers and the pope are used as examples of magisterium. The claim
made here is that these two magisteria do not overlap, nor do they encompass all inquiry.
Also mentioned in the essay is the example of Pope John Pauls acceptance of the theory of
evolution. Although the concept has already been considerably accepted into the catholic church, it
was a turn of events due to John Pauls acceptance under the NOMA principle. John Paul still
practiced under catholicism, but still openly considered evolutions legitimacy. As he puts it It has been
proven true; we always celebrate natures factuality, and we look forward to interesting discussions of
theological implications. Gould uses Pope John Paul as an example to show that his acceptance is
due to each subjects non overlapping concepts.
Now despite being presented with Goulds Non Overlapping Magisteria, Fishman goes against
this in his article by beginning to question sciences possible impact on the supernatural. Fishman
claims that NOMAs argument of separate realms is just an act of defense. Fishman brings in a quote
saying NOMA is popular only because there is no evidence to favour the God hypothesis. From here
he says that science is able to question the supernatural, but once it is questioned, people of religion
go straight to the differences involved with NOMA. So how is one able to question the supernatural
with science?
Fishman first brings up the question of what makes a claim testable. As it is defined A claim is
testable if there can be evidence of whatever kind for or against a claim.Given this definition, Fishman
states that scientists have three possibilities when it comes to evaluating the truth of a claim. (1) By
consideration of the prior probability of a claim being true, (2) by looking and seeing and (3) by
consideration of plausible alternative explanations for the evidence. With all three of these
possibilities comes the structure of Bayes theorem.
This theorem consists of the quantity probability of a hypothesis. Fishman mentions that all of
these probabilities are assumed to be conditional on any background information that may be
available. With Bayes theorem it is able to capture a lot of the features that is scientifically practiced.
Such Practices including confirmation and disconfirmation by logical entailment, confirmatory effect of
surprising evidence, and the differential effect of positive and negative evidence. With the help of

Bayes theorem, Fishman states that science is able to apply it to supernatural claims due to its
testability. This is achieved in three factors. Hypothesis evaluated based on prior probabilities,
hypotheses evaluated based on confirming or disconfirming evidence, and hypotheses evaluated
based on the availability of plausible alternative explanations.
From here we go back to Fishmans argument stating that NOMA is only used as something to
retreat back to. Although NOMA states that science and the supernatural do not have an overlay,
Bayes theorem contradicts that. Since the supernatural has testability, it is able to be applied through
the Bayes theorem structure. Fishmans belief as to why there is a fall back to NOMA goes as
followed, When the evidence overwhelmingly goes against their hypothesis, they may suggest that
their theory is scientifically testable, thereby retreating to a NOMA position. This reasoning as
Fishman puts it does not indicate that supernatural hypothesis are inherently untestable, but rather
the dedication of true believers to a favored hypothesis.
Both the essay and article come to their particular conclusions due to their own separate
reasonings. The theory of Goulds belief that science and the supernatural are completely untouched
entities, goes against Fishmans belief on the ability to scientifically challenge the supernatural. While
NOMA is seen more as a separate point of view towards each subject, Bayes theorem is considered
leaning more on the formulaic approach. Although both of these realms are adjacent towards each
other they are considered correct in their own ways. One must understand that analyzing each point of
view is important when understanding the supernatural and science. They are both well respected
paths that although may have different perspectives, should be seen as options as to what we want to
accept when it comes to the their materials.

Word Count: 1008