On Wed, 14 Feb 2001 12:13:07 -0700 John W Burgeson <burgytwo@juno.com>
writes:
> >>It's a very random process of throwing together available
> ingredients.
> Yet I
> do create. And generally everybody seems pretty pleased with what
> ends
> up on
> the table.>>
>
> I'd probably argue that what you throw together is not quite random.
> Else
> you might set a table with dog food and a pepper shaker and raw beef
> and
> the kitchen dust mop. But you really select (not at random) among
> what is
> edible in the pantry & refrigerator.
>
> IOW -- you create.
>
> I think that is what creation is, in the last analysis. Starting
> with a
> chaotic situation and ending up with something both complex and
> specified. Even if the specification is done as part of the
> creation
> process rather than as a prior plan.
>
> Burgy (John Burgeson)
>
Burgy,
I think you have characterized human creativity--almost. We often start
with stuff ordered one way (an artist's palette is not disordered, though
it gets to looking rather messy to those who don't understand what is
being done) and produce a new order, one that is ideally thoroughly
novel. One can also produce an order with paint by number that is
superior to the product done from scratch. But that is not creative.
With the Creator, we first have creatio ex nihilo. But this, which is an
absolute limit which our creativity cannot attain, is not the lower limit
to God, who also creates using created stuff. He creates using both
primary and secondary causes. This latter fact seems to get confused by
both OEC and YEC, and by most proponents of ID. However, TE involves ID
as well.
Dave
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Feb 15 2001 - 15:21:42 EST