Van Till's chapter

From: Bertvan@aol.com
Date: Sat Jul 29 2000 - 11:45:23 EDT

  • Next message: Cliff Lundberg: "major logical flaw"

    Thanks to Steve Crawford and Dave Bradbury for their thoughtful, stimulating
    posts. Great additions to the list!! It is true that ID was started by
    theists. However I suspect it will appeal to agnostics, or anyone else who
    considers the scientific evidence unconvincing for random mutation and
    natural selection. (Agnostics are comfortable with unknowns and
    undecidables.) Most IDs state repeatedly that they do not necessarily
    oppose "evolution", but rather they question Darwinism (RM&NS) as an
    explanation of evolution. My own skepticism of RM&NS is not due to any
    philosophical conflict, but rather that I don't see RM&NS as supported by the
    evidence.

      RM&NS specifically denies the possible existence of teleology. Over the
    past century many people have somehow managed to reconcile their theism to
    this belief in a of lack of teleology in nature, and if ID becomes a widely
    accepted concept, I suspect atheists will similarly manage to reconcile their
    beliefs to ID. Atheists can call it something like "natural organization".
    Kauffman calls it "order for free". ID does not specifically deny any
    particular philosophy or religious belief. It merely states that life is
    obviously the result of a complex design and not the result of random
    processes - and could possibly include teleology.

    Bertvan
    http://members.aol.com/bertvan



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Jul 29 2000 - 11:45:33 EDT