From: Ted Davis (TDavis@messiah.edu)
Date: Tue Sep 23 2003 - 08:40:19 EDT
Why doesn't the ID movement distance itself from YEC, as I have been asking
them for some time?
Here's what Phil Johnson says (I'm going from memory, just take the sense
and not the words as Phil's).
If he and his camp were to disavow the YECs, what would be gained? Would
the scientific establishment suddenly warm up to ID? Would they cease
calling ID advocates, "intelligent design creationists," in an effort to
dismiss their arguments without engaging them?
My answers: (1) Respect, or at least less disrespect. (Phil disagrees)
(2) No, the scientific community as a whole is incapable of considering any
interpretation of scientific evidence that incorporates a mind that
pre-dates the universe. This isn't an objective response, but it's the
response that one sees. (3) Generally, yes. IMO, some ID arguments are
powerful and have not been refuted, they have only been shouted down. An
example is Dembski's point that science *does* accept the validity of making
inferences to intelligence--something like that must underlie the SETI
project, archaeology, anthropology, etc. But scientists simply won't allow
the intelligence to be "supernatural."
I'm still of both minds on this one. I wonder what others on this list
would say, in response to those questions.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Sep 23 2003 - 08:37:53 EDT