From: Jim Armstrong (email@example.com)
Date: Thu Jan 30 2003 - 12:00:46 EST
This touches on another difficult issue in creating a balanced
explanatory presentation like you are undertaking, namely labels. There
are so many names and terms that have been grabbed and used as labels by
one interest or another that the whole matter of writing descriptive
terms is somewhat like negotiating a minefield. Worse yet, many of those
labels mean different things to different people. I make every effort to
stay away from labels as such (like those collective words that end in
-ist), but some explanation of labels is inevitable and that activity
alone consumes a discouraging amount of time! I wish there was a fix for
this. Maybe we should replace labels with a system of mathematical
expressions that follow something like the library's Dewey Decimal
System so we can have more specificity in our labeling!?
This is sort of taking on the flavor of an "open source" slide set for
use in this discourse ...like Linux? Kewl idea!
Best wishes Jim Armstrong
Josh Bembenek wrote:
>> --On your slide with the eye, don't label the two views "creationist"
>> "evolutionist." Label the first view "anti-evolutionist" or
>> like that. After all, we can believe both that the complex eye
>> evolved AND that God created it.
> Agreed, I was using terminology that most people would be familiar
> with I think. I view most creationists as being anti-evolutionists,
> especially within the church community here, but it is an important
> distinction that I want to make (especially with the discussion of the
> theistic evolution veiwpoint.)
>> --You may want to think about how you'll answer questions of
> I will definitely do this within the specific discussion of each
> viewpoint. I will mostly follow the information offered in "Three
> Veiws on Creation and Evolution."
> Thanks for the link and comments,
> The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE*
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jan 30 2003 - 12:03:01 EST