>>Bertvan
>>Hi Cliff. Is the explanatory power of ID greater that that of naturalism,
>>which also appears to claim the ability to explain everything?
Cliff:
>Science doesn't explain everything, it just hopes to.
Bertvan:
Maybe this is a difference between materialists and non materialists. I,
personally have no particular HOPE that the inexplicable exists. In fact, I
take great delight in those materialist explanations which appear reasonable
to me, and would continue to ponder possible materialistic explanations for
any inexplicable phenomena - while at the same time acknowledging the
possibility that none may exist. Many of us were delighted with "random
mutation and natural selection as an explanation of macro evolution" - as
long as the theory appeared reasonable to us.
Bertvan
>>Could materialism adjust to the possibility that abiogenesis will never be
>>explained?
Cliff:
>Sure, if you could explain why this must be so.
Bertvan:
I should have said "the possibility that abiogenesis MIGHT never be
explained". Abiogenesis may well have a materialists explanation. I just
wouldn't be eager to invest my energy in a search for one. The Princeton
Anomalies Lab claims to have produced tiny, but statistically reproducible
measurements of ESP phenomena. If their results became more widely
accepted, how would a materialist adjust?
Bertvan
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Feb 15 2000 - 07:34:28 EST