Re: [asa] STATEMENT ON INTELLIGENT DESIGN BY IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY FACULTY

From: <cmekve@aol.com>
Date: Thu May 17 2007 - 17:59:23 EDT

Philosopher Eliot Sober has repeatedly pointed out (and he is not alone) that we have no idea whatsoever of the "odds" involved in evaluating the probability that an event was produced by a Designer. The odds may be remote for an event being "natural", but they might be far more remote for a Designer to be involved. We can't know. Hence Dempski is doomed from the start.
 
And if I understand your last paragraph, you are right. ID suggests that the Designer might be an intelligent Martian, which they have to say to be "non-religious" and have a chance to get in public schools. But that seems to be a step toward a 21st century version of the Marcionist heresy -- a Designer/Creator who is not the God of the Old Testament and the Word of the New T. So to avoid heresy they should admit ID is at least part theology [I would say bad theology], which of course denies them access to public science education. Catch-22 strikes again.
 
Karl
*******************
Karl V. Evans
cmekve@aol.com
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Dawsonzhu@aol.com
To: pvm.pandas@gmail.com; pleuronaia@gmail.com
Cc: asa@calvin.edu
Sent: Thu, 17 May 2007 9:54 AM
Subject: Re: [asa] STATEMENT ON INTELLIGENT DESIGN BY IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY FACULTY

Pim wrote:

I'd love to hear these so called 'scientific claims' of ID?

I think in Dembski's original book (The Design Inference),
he gives some examples such as Nicholas Caputo who probably
rigged the votes, some varieties of forensic science such
as detecting plagiarism, and cryptography or SETI problems.

I think the main difference between these examples and
the religious one is that you can estimate the
odds with some level of certainty in the above examples.

Gambling casinos can generally guess when someone is
cheating because they know the odds of the game, and
they would not be in business if they didn't know how
to make a profit. In the same way, the odds of selecting
the same party for the top position in the ballot 40 out
of 41 times in a "random" selection has estimable odds.
Coming up with 3 pages of identical text has odds that
can be estimated. Intercepted ET communications are
less clear, but given language has some universal features
and the communicators are not using code, these also have
estimable odds.

The main reason ID is useless for its religious purpose is
because God is not an ET (some unspecified complex organism
of an advanced civilization). We would find evidence of
the ET, evidence for God need not be so because it depends
of God what he shows.

  
________________________________________________________________________
AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Thu May 17 17:59:52 2007

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu May 17 2007 - 17:59:52 EDT