Allen, you wrote: "In trying to decipher your argument, it has become
obvious that Naturalism and Creationism should be defined:
NATURALISM is the assumption taken by faith that matter/energy/motion
originated and continually operates according to natural laws by which
interact that is inherent within them. Nature is all there is and has
been or ever will be."
I agree that words should be defined. Those definitions, however, need to
be agreed to by all debaters, else we simply whistle past each other.
The definition you have above is, IMHO, one of PHILOSOPHICAL Naturalism.
The very word "naturalism," Like the word "evolution," means many things
to many people and so limiting adjectives are ALWAYS advisable.
I commend to you the definitions used by my friend, David Griffin. You
can read them in his excellent book, RELIGION and SCIENTIFIC NATURALISM.
Check out my review, which was published by Metanexus and also appears on
my web site (the link is on page 2).
John Burgeson (Burgy)
(science/theology, quantum mechanics, baseball, ethics,
humor, cars, God's intervention into natural causation, etc.)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Feb 08 2002 - 15:01:11 EST