Ralph:
>I still don't know why agnostics would be attracted to ID. If there is an ID
>with some sort of overall plan, then the history of life on earth is the
>history of that plan in action. So far, the defining feature seems to be
>extinction, in various degrees of severity. Why is extinction by chance
>worse than extinction by design? I know you think if a species goes extinct
>that's a sign that they were a mistake, outside of the plan. If that's true,
>how do we know we're not "outside of the plan" and headed for eventual
>"error correction"?
ralph
Hi Ralph,
One reason this agnostic is attracted to ID is exasperation with "chance
variation and natural selection". I am interested in many people's thoughts
on evolution, including panspermia, Lamarckism, Holism -- and Fred Hoyle's
"The Intelligent Universe". To me, "intelligence" is the significant part
of ID. I doubt evolution was the result of some rigid "plan". However the
entire process is loaded with "intelligence". I believe nature is the
result of intelligence and not the result of a series of chance events. (I
don't see how one can say any part of nature, such as extinction, is "worse"
or "better". If I gave the impression that was my belief, I didn't make
myself clear.) I probably disagree with most of Philip Johnson's political
positions and views on religion. However I do agree when he charges that
Darwinism has been used as an attempt to impose materialism upon society as
"scientific truth". It is my personal observation that most of the people
passionately fighting ID are engaged in some juvenile, paranoid crusade
against religion. Being committed to neither atheism nor theism, I would
protest either being imposed upon society as "truth", scientific or
otherwise. At the moment no one is trying to impose ID upon anyone. It is
being suggested as an alternative way of viewing nature. Materialists are
still free to dream up their elaborate "chance" explanations. That doesn't
appear good enough for them. They seem to want to prevent anyone even
considering anything but "chance variation and natural selection".
Bertvan
http://members.aol.com/bertvan
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Sep 25 2000 - 10:31:46 EDT