>Because intelligent causes are empirically detectable,
>science must ever remain open to evidence of their activity.
If you want a common credo for the ID group, there it is. (By
implication:
methodological naturalism is unsound.) Theologically, this might be
understood under the dictum, "Adopt no philosophy of science which ties
God's hands."
-----------------------------
As sympathetic as I am to the ID concept, and as much as I admire the
ongoing efforts of Paul, and Bill Dembski, et.al., the above seems to me
to be exactly the point at which I part company with them. Let me
explain.
First of all, I wholly agree with the Bill Dembski quote that Paul cites.
And if that is a common credo for the ID group, that's fine; I'll accept
that. But I do not see where that credo has anything at all to do with
whether methodological naturalism (MN) is unsound or not. Nor do I see
that it necessarily has anything at all to do with theology.
I still hold that MN is a proper base for science -- because it works so
well. I need no secondary justification, though I can accept the fact
that others might.
Assume for a moment that it is the year 2020. Bill and Paul have just
been awarded the Nobel prize for their work on ID which has established
beyond reasonable doubt that the ID concept is valid, leads to some
highly interesting science projects, etc. There is just no reasonable
doubt now, in 95% of the scientific populace, that life on earth did not
arise naturally, from inert chemicals, but that some intelligence was
necessarily involved.
Does ANYTHING change with respect to the ongoing debates about God? Not
really. All that has happened is that science has (finally) shown that
something more than mankind exists. It may be that even by 2020 we will
be able only to say a few things we "know" about this non-human
intelligence. Three things occur to me:
1. The intelligence is at least equal to that of humanity, and likely
greater.
2. The intelligence is (or was) technologically more advanced than
humanity today.
3. The intelligence has (or had) a sense of humor.
Whether the intelligence is one, or many; whether it still exists,
whether it has ANY of the characteristics of "God" will still (probably)
be items to speculate upon.
The debates over "Science & Christianity" will still be going on.
Burgy (John W. Burgeson)
Imago Dei (who cares where I once earned my living?)
Regular e-mail address is Burgy@Compuserve.com