In a message dated 9/17/2000 5:06:31 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
Bertvan@aol.com writes:
<< Steve:
ID is probably of no "value" to die-hard philosophical materialists, but
fortunately most people's minds are not bound by that particular metaphysical
strait-jacket.
>SJ>>But then what is he arguing against ID for?
FJ>TO show that it is full of holes.
But if FJ thinks that ID is "unimportant", why does he bother to "show
that it is full of holes"?
>>
Poor logic dear Bertvan. I am concluding that ID is "unimportant" or rather I
am arguing against
ID because I have shown that it is full of holes.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Sep 17 2000 - 20:55:07 EDT