Re: [asa] Revisiting an ID critique

From: Michael Roberts <michael.andrea.r@ukonline.co.uk>
Date: Wed May 16 2007 - 02:30:27 EDT

The confusion between id and ID sometimes comes out on Pandas thumb where the likes of Polkinghorne and Gingerich have been taken by some posters as bad as Dembski or Morris.

On Uncommon Descent the discussion on Tipler a few weeks ago who with fine tuning would be id (non-theistic) they tried to claim him as an ally for ID

But invincible ignorance is hard to counter whether in its YE, ID or atheist forms

Michael
  ----- Original Message -----
  From: Randy Isaac
  To: asa@calvin.edu
  Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2007 4:42 PM
  Subject: Re: [asa] Revisiting an ID critique

  Jim Armstrong wrote:

  "...The first is the shift away from capital letters in "Intelligent Design..."

  a few years ago, Owen Gingerich started talking about "intelligent design" with lower case i and lower case d as being the foundational concept of a Creator that all Christians would affirm, while "Intelligent Design" with capital I and D referred to the ID movement with a particular approach to detecting design in nature. I think that's a very helpful distinction, though you have to listen carefully sometimes to distinguish the case of the letters. Confusion between the two concepts and the tendency to move seamlessly from one to the other during a discussion are the sources of many disputes and misunderstanding.

  In your note, are you suggesting that the lower case is now being increasingly used to signify what had been upper case ID? Can you point to some examples? Such a tendency would only serve to further obfuscate the discussion.

  Randy

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Wed May 16 02:31:58 2007

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed May 16 2007 - 02:32:06 EDT