Reflectorites
On Mon, 17 Apr 2000 15:54:34 -0700, Tedd Hadley wrote:
[...]
>SJ>"For followers of Karl Popper's analysis of science and how it
>>should be done, there is no more dismal example of a metaphysical
>>system masquerading as a science than the theory of evolution...
TH>Just to emphasize my point to Stephen Jones regarding the
>difficulty of trying to extract solid conclusions from limited
>quotes, I offer this one:
>
>"It does appear that some people think that I denied scientific
>character to the historical sciences, such as paleontology, or
>the history of the evolution of life on Earth. This is a mistake,
>and I here wish to affirm that these and other historical sciences
>have in my opinion scientific character; their hypotheses can
>in many cases be tested." (Popper, Letter to _New Scientist_,
>87(1981):611)
>
>(nor should this limited quote be construed as a solid conclusion
>about Karl Popper, whose views seem to have changed quite
>a bit over his life :)
I have at least twice on this Reflector pointed out that this so-called
`recantation' by Popper was in fact nothing of the sort and in that it is more
likely that Popper was being sarcastic knowing that the Darwinists, like
drowning men, would clutch at any straw he waved in front of them.
If Tedd disputes the point then I will post it all again, despite the fact that
he will then probably retreat to an unfalsifiable position by claiming
something like:
>I'm skipping most of your quotes. While interesting, I believe
>they often do not fairly represent the views of the persons
>quoted, they lack enough context to be sure of the view expressed,
>and they do not take into account changing views over time or
>new discoveries.
Steve
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
"And not- less surprised to be informed, that the watch in his hand was
nothing more than the result of the laws of metallic nature. It is a
perversion of language to assign any law, as the efficient, operative, cause
of any thing. A law presupposes an agent; for it is only the mode,
according to which an agent proceeds: it implies a power; for it is the
order, according to which that power acts. Without this agent, without this
power, which are both distinct from itself, the law does nothing; is nothing.
The expression, "the law of metallic nature," may sound strange and harsh
to a philosophic ear, but it seems quite as justifiable as some others which
are more familiar to him, such as "the law of vegetable nature"-" the law of
animal nature," or indeed as "the law of nature" in general, when assigned
as the cause of phaenomena, in exclusion of agency and power, or when it
is substituted into the place of these." (Paley W., "Natural Theology: or,
Evidences of the Existence and Attributes of the Deity, Collected from the
Appearances of Nature," [1802], St. Thomas Press: Houston TX, 1972,
reprint, p.5)
Stephen E. Jones | sejones@iinet.net.au | http://www.iinet.net.au/~sejones
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Apr 19 2000 - 10:01:18 EDT