Re: Why I don't reject ID

From: FMAJ1019@aol.com
Date: Wed Oct 11 2000 - 01:05:50 EDT

  • Next message: FMAJ1019@aol.com: "Re: NS and intelligent designers"

    In a message dated 10/10/2000 4:12:40 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
    rwein@lineone.net writes:

    > >[...]
    > >
    > >Note how it works. Richard (who is an atheist and therefore denies design
    > >apriori) calls for evidence for design. Yet when evidence is submitted,
    > >Richard say he fails to see it!
    >
    > Oh Stephen, Stephen. Will you never learn? The fact that I've concluded that
    > there's no God does not mean that I deny design a priori. In fact you've
    > made *two* logical errors here.
    >
    > 1) A person who arrives at one conclusion has not a priori rejected the
    > contrary conclusion. And he may change his mind in the light of new
    > evidence.
    >
    > 2) Atheism and design are not mutually contradictory, as the designer could
    > be an alien species. (For the umpteenth time!)
    >

    It's interesting how Stephen on one hand seems to claim that ID says nothing
    about the designer but on the other hand seems to insist that an atheistic
    viewpoint denies design a priori. Somwhat inconsistent imho.



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Oct 11 2000 - 01:06:08 EDT