Re: Phillip Johnson interview

From: John W Burgeson (
Date: Mon Apr 30 2001 - 11:23:03 EDT

  • Next message: Kamilla ludwig: "Re: wow. some "Christians.""

    Larry posted: " I have enjoyed watching this concerted research
    effort by some good Christians on the ASA List, to do away with the need
    take PJ and the ID movement seriously. Or, is it an attempt to help good

    Christian PJ by showing him how he can be more precise, and more

    I think Larry is being just a little sarcastic here. Apologies if not so.

    There are those on the list who view some of what Phil is doing as being
    possibly destructive to the Christian faith. I doubt that anyone here
    thinks Phil is doing this deliberately. Almost all are in support of his
    one goal -- to counteract the Dawkins-Sagan-Pigiacci sermons that "nature
    is all there is." But some of us are not particularly supportive of his
    means to do that.

    My own problem with Phil, and I've discussed this with him on occasion,
    is that he sees no difference between the terms "philosophical
    naturalism" and "methodological naturalism." That there IS a difference
    seems so clear to me (at least) that I have real difficulty with this
    apparent blindness in his writings.

    I like Phil a great deal. We will have much to talk with him about in the
    life to come. Although this subject will probably be a very small part of
    that conversation.

    Burgy (John Burgeson)

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Apr 30 2001 - 11:22:33 EDT