Hi Mike,
I hope it is "in the cards", and please do explain further.
Many scientists, cosmologists, physicists, etc., seem able to address
questions of teleology and philosophies other than materialism. Theories
such as the Big Bang or the expanding universe can be discussed and even
challenged without bringing out the anti-religion fanatics. If teleology is
ever acknowledged as a possibility by science, I agree that such a movement
must start with the scientists themselves. However, I don't see signs of
such tolerance among biologists. They seem capable of ensuring that
biologists toe the line. If ID doesn't survive as a scientific concept,
perhaps it will succeed in defining the issues for some of the public. Among
ID supporters in this discussion group at the moment, you, DNAunion, Nelson,
and I are not religious (as far as I know). Although Stephen is religious,
he his reasons for skepticism of Darwinism are scientific. Surely a time
will come when neo Darwinists will have to stop claiming all opposition to
"random variation and natural selection" equals religious fundamentalism.
Bertvan:
http://members.aol.com/bertvan
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Oct 04 2000 - 13:12:52 EDT