Re: supernatural observation & faith def.

Stephen Gooch (sgooch@sm10.sciatl.com)
Mon, 30 Sep 1996 14:34:56 -0400

Paul,

You are using ID as a tool were it is not needed. One does not need to consider
ID to observe that some feature has no function.

On Sep 30, 11:05am, Paul A. Nelson wrote:
>
> Subject: Re: supernatural observation & faith def.
>
> . . .
>
> Why are male nipples, or webbed feet on upland geese, surprising at all?
> How is it that they stand out against the rest of nature and seem to call
> for a special kind of explanation?
>
> Because a theory, ID (Paley's version, let's say), told us not to expect
> to see such things.
>
> That's a useful theory, or, more modestly, a theory that says something
> about the world. It rules out certain possibly observable states
> of affairs. When we then *observe* those states of affairs, we have
> a puzzle calling for explanation.
>
> Paul Nelson
>
>
>-- End of excerpt from Paul A. Nelson

-- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------     Stephen Gooch                                      stephen.gooch@asu.edu                   770.903.6778 || 602.891.2300 || 800.388.6242*2300