Bertvan@aol.com wrote:
>My version of ID is that life is designed by the intelligence contained
>within life itself. To understand life we have to move beyond the simplistic
>model envisioned by most materialists and include the ingredient that
>distinguishes life from non-life -- choice. Intelligence of a sort is
>included in every molecule of living matter. Intelligence and choice are
>difficult to distinguish. Certainly choice couldn't exist in the absence of
>intelligence.
This species of ID is new to me. I thought the overall designer, over
and above the whole system, and distinct from agents within the system,
was a sine a qua non.
>I probably disagree with ID as most people conceive it, but I am not a
>materialist.
But "materialists" don't conceive of ID at all.
> And I have developed a distaste for the arrogant intolerance of
>most people who promote materialism.
I have never seen the term 'materialism' promoted by those you call
'materialists'.
> People in the ID movement dare to look beyond materialism.
But they're the only ones who use the term! They are hung up on
it, working scientists are not.
Isn't there something wrong with calling people something they don't
call themselves? You can call yourself anything you want and I will
accept that and refer to you as that. I won't apply terms to you that
you don't apply to yourself.
--Cliff Lundberg ~ San Francisco ~ 415-648-0208 ~ cliff@cab.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri May 19 2000 - 15:06:45 EDT