Reflectorites
On Fri, 8 Sep 2000 13:47:56 -0400, Nelson Alonso wrote:
A welcome to the Reflector from me to Nelson. Maybe Nelson can tell us a
bit about himself?
Nelson:
Hello Steven thanks for the welcome.
I will be filling in my website soon that will contain a short
bibliography,CV, and some stuff about ID.
http://www.csam.montclair.edu/~alonso
>FJ>True but it's obvious where the ID movement wants to take it.
>SJ>It is not "obvious" at all. The ID movement includes Christians
>(Catholic, Protestant, Orthodox) as well as Jews and at least one
>agnostic. Where *could* "the ID movement ... take it" after
>design has been empirically detected in nature?
NA>Jones:
>Most of these ID'ers fall in the category of a Christian God.
Steve:
I didn't say this. It was "FMAJ1019"! I am "SJ" (Steve Jones).
Nelson:
Sorry Steve, my mistake.
<snip>
>SJ>Besides, if design is reliably detected in nature, it will rapidly
>become *much* bigger than the ID movement. In fact the ID
>movement might even cease to exist, because it would have
>accomplished its task.
NA>Jones:
>The problem is that even if design could be reliably detected, and the
>evidence suggests that it cannot, it cannot exclude natural forces as the
>designer. What task would ID have accomplished?
Steve:
I didn't say this either!
Nelson:
Oops.
NA>Nelson:
>What evidence suggests it cannot? I think the data presented thus far by
>Behe et. al. can reliably exclude natural forces.
Steve:
Agreed. I keep saying "if the ID movement demonstrates that design is
empirically detectable". But they already have done that in that Behe's
irreducibly complex cases like the blood clotting cascade and the bacterial
flagellum.
It is just that the scientific materialists deny it on the basis of their
*philosophy* which excludes intelligent causation in natural history
apriori.
Nelson:
I was convinced of this when I read Behe's rejection letters when he tried
to publish his responses to peer reviewed journals. It didn't even get
passed the editor's desk and none of the letters addressed any of his
_scientific_ points.
http://www.discovery.org/viewDB/index.php3?program=CRSC%20Responses&command=
view&id=450
<snip: good points on Dawkins and genetics>
>FJ>If they only
>>realized that since it does not identify the designer
>SJ>The ID movement *does* realise it. I have previously mentioned Fred
>Hoyle's "Intelligent Universe" hypothesis as possibly within the ID
>paradigm. The common bond of all members of the ID movement is
>the belief in the existence (or at least the possibility) of empirically
>detectable *design* in nature. It is *not* agreement on who is the
>designer.
NA>Jones:
>Including nature as the designer? Lacking independent evidence of the
>designer what does ID have to offer that presently science does not offer?
Not me again!
NA>Nelson:
>Nature does not "design", it makes designoids. Mike Gene could make the
same
>argument about "evolvoids".
Steve:
Agreed. But my point was that ID is agnostic about the designer.
Nelson:
Yes, in that the identity of the designer is unknown, but that it is an
intelligent agent.
>SJ>I assume FJ is getting mixed up with "evidence" and proof? If FJ is
>actually claiming that this is not even "evidence" then maybe he could
state what
>he would accept as evidence that the ID movement could present.
NA>Jones:
>Then anything could be considered evidence of design. Why just irreducible
>complexity? Why not include regular complexity? Design is a placeholder for
>"we don't know yet". At least in the case of biological design where no
>independent evidence of design or designers exist to allow us to make a
>case.
Again, this is "FMAJ1019", not me.
NA>Nelson:
>Only if you a priori assume it evolved. "I understand it" does not mean "it
>evolved".
"FMAJ1019" is also confusing "design" in general with "ID". ID is a
*special case* of design, namely those things which cannot be anything
else *but* be the result of intelligent causation.
Nelson:
Great post Steve. I snipped most of it out of agreement, but I did read and
understand your points and I learned a lot from them. Keep it up!
-------------------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Sep 14 2000 - 13:39:26 EDT