RE: ASA's "neutrality policy"

From: Gregory Arago <>
Date: Tue Dec 20 2005 - 17:36:02 EST

Hello Dick,
  Let me ask you to clarify if you please. Do you believe there was an actual person named 'Adam' and a person named 'Eve' from which all humanity descended or ascended or procreated into us? Is that correct: those two persons actually existed in history, they are not just fiction?
  If so, would you then care to speak more specifically about the time and place of Adam and his wife's existence that you deem important? There is a time and a place for everything. Just so you know that I don't mean to bait you with this last question, let me say that I personally don't wish to speak about it because I'm not an Origins of Life or Origins of Humanity scientist, philosopher or theologian. Surely you're not suggesting that the existence or non-existence of those persons is something people can or should remain neutral about?
  As for the neutrality policy, there are some who claim that neither science, nor philosophy, nor religion can ultimately be neutral. A value-free policy, they would say, is no policy at all. Neutrality is a figment of the nihilist's imagination.
  "Do not fear the lack of knowledge, fear false knowledge. All evil in this world comes from false knowledge." - Lev N. Tolstoy
  In this vein, let me admit that I have appreciated those at ASA who report on the errors of other scientists. For example, when a false theory, discovery or experiment is reported, those at ASA who are specially trained to realize it and who report on the falsity of the finding. Thus, as a source of error-detection, ASA certainly defends the cause of scientific accuracy and scientific 'truth'.
  The objectivity of (natural) science and the recognized presence of a double-hermeneutic are another matter for communication altogether.
  p.s. the Dover trial conclusion made news on BBC Europe today (GMT +3)
Dick Fischer <> wrote:
        As to Adam, I don’t care whether Adam was created by God’s own two(?) hands out of the Mesopotamian clay or whether Adam was a gifted child of two adoring human parents. Either way works for me. It’s the time of Adam and the place of Adam that I believe is important. And my position squares with the Bible, whereas the YEC position fails on that score too!
  ~Dick Fischer~ Genesis Proclaimed Association
  Finding Harmony in Bible, Science, and History

Find your next car at Yahoo! Canada Autos
Received on Tue Dec 20 18:16:12 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Dec 20 2005 - 18:16:12 EST