Re: ID vs. ?

From: FMAJ1019@aol.com
Date: Fri Sep 01 2000 - 00:54:31 EDT

  • Next message: FMAJ1019@aol.com: "Re: ID vs ?"

    Bertvan: ID hasn't yet become dogmatic enough to have a rigid definition. M
    y
    definition is merely the conclusion that universe is the result of a rationa
    l
    design, rather the result of random processes.

    A definition that is a conclusion? One would hope for more than that.

    Bertvan: It includes the belief that
    life consists of more than matter and the impersonal physical forces we now
    recognize. (mind, creativity, spontaneity, free will are forces science
    does
    not presently know how to deal with) The Gaia concept is certainly a part
    of
    ID.
        
    So natural forces can be definitely a form of ID? That does seem to reduce
    the meaning of ID a little.



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Sep 01 2000 - 00:54:38 EDT