Re: [asa] gonzalez' citation record

From: David Opderbeck <dopderbeck@gmail.com>
Date: Fri May 25 2007 - 17:23:59 EDT

*Having heard Francis Collins speak, I would put him in the second camp. If
I recall correctly,
the blogger I quoted is also a theist and would probably also agree.*

Louise, what are the substantive differences between what Gonzalez said in
his book about the cosmological design argument and what Collins said about
the same argument in his? As far as I can tell, they're essentially the
same argument. I think you're tarring Gonzelez just because he's associated
with the DI, rather than because of anything he said in his book.

If the blogger you quoted is a theist, I'd respectfully submit that he has
to do alot more work on the interface between science and faith, because he
clearly buys into the "warfare" hypothesis.

On 5/25/07, Freeman, Louise Margaret <lfreeman@mbc.edu> wrote:
>
> Gonzalez's design arguments are essentially the same
> > ones
> > made by Francis Collins in "The Language of God," essentially the same
> > ones
> > made by Owen Gingerich in "God's Universe," essentially the same ones
> > made
> > by Stephen Barr in "Modern Physics and Ancient Faith," essentially the
> > same
> > ones made by Simon Conway Morris in "Life's Solution," and so on. This
> > guy
> > is arguing that it's ok to write about the implications of science for
> > a
> > popular audience, *but* *only if the discussion excludes any notion of
> > teleology*. Expressing *any* notion that the remarkable properties of
> > life
> > and the universe reflect design -- even while accepting that life and
> > the
> > universe can also be explained in terms of "natural" causes -- is
> > grounds
> > for ostracism by the scientific community.
>
> I just started Collins book and have not read the others, so it's hard to
> comment directly, but I
> would say there is a pretty clear line between the standard "the universe
> contains features that
> cannot be explained except by an Intelligent Designer" and the "I believe
> a Creator designed the
> universe but science is not the way to search for evidence of Him" The
> former typically stress
> the "gaps" of evolutionary, old earth and common descent theories while
> the latter stress their
> explanatory power. The DI generally likes the first but not the second;
> most science
> departments are embarassed / feel threatened by the first but have little
> problem with the
> second.
> Having heard Francis Collins speak, I would put him in the second
> camp. If I recall correctly,
> the blogger I quoted is also a theist and would probably also agree.
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Fri May 25 17:24:28 2007

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri May 25 2007 - 17:24:28 EDT