Do Materialists call everything they don't understand "mumbo jumbo"?

From: Bertvan@aol.com
Date: Thu Oct 19 2000 - 12:20:19 EDT

  • Next message: Richard Wein: "Re: Baylor Lariat article on DI web site"

    A fertilized egg is one cell. Science has come a long way in analyzing what
    that cell contains, but we don't have much understanding of how the bits of
    matter in that single cell turn into a complex organism. We know that bits of
    DNA produce proteins, but we don't really understand how those proteins
    arrange themselves into the complex patterns of a living organism. The
    information, or design, of the adult organism is contained within that single
    cell. The same design is presumably not contained in the cell without the
    fertilization, and different fertilizations produce different designs. I
    suppose materialists don't regard this process as "supernatural" because it
    happens consistently enough that they have become accustomed to it. This
    ability of a single cell to turn into a complex organism is a quality not
    possessed by rocks, and if Chris wants to call it plain old "dumb stuff",
    that does seem to be stretching the definition of "dumb".

     If a cell can contain the design for the entire future of the organism, I
    see no reason why it couldn't contain the design for the future evolution of
    the organism. There would be plenty of room for the designs of evolution to
    be contained in DNA we have labeled "junk". A design is no less of a design
    because it is specified by DNA. I wonder why materialists feel compelled
    to think up a materialist explanation, such as Darwinism (chance variation
    and natural selection), to explain evolution. They accept the maturation of
    individual organisms as the result of individual designs - without any
    materialist explanation?

    Most people acknowledge the obvious existence of free will, spontaneity,
    intelligence, creativity, consciousness and mind, and there is evidence they
    can occasionally effect living matter. But these forces are trickier for
    materialists. Since there is nothing consistent about them, I suppose
    materialists fear some people might attribute some aspect of them to God.
    Maybe this is the reason that materialists feel compelled to argue that free
    will, spontaneity, creativity, intelligence and mind don't exist.
    Materialists also seem inclined to argue that anything not mechanistically
    consistent would be supernatural. Or dismiss it as "mumbo jumbo".

    Bertvan
    http://members.aol.com/bertvan



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Oct 19 2000 - 12:20:31 EDT