Re: [asa] Nature on Gonzalez Tenue

From: PvM <pvm.pandas@gmail.com>
Date: Sat May 26 2007 - 12:02:19 EDT

On 5/26/07, philtill@aol.com <philtill@aol.com> wrote:
>
>
> > Perhaps we should gave the signees a bit of grace as well and not
> > limit ourselves to these three options?
>
> 1. Maybe the signees should have given a bit more grace to the person they
> were attacking.

They were attacking a concept not a person. Did you not read the statement?

> 2. You are asking whether we should give a bit more grace to the signees
> for permanently hurting the life of a human being --- not merely for signing
> a flawed statement.

Flawed in what sense? For opposing intelligent design as being
science? Since ID is scientifically vacuous that seems hardly flawed?
For defining methodological naturalism the way they did? Again I do
not see why the definition in context is flawed?

And pray tell, how did they permanently hurt he life of a human being
by their statement? Are you still believing that their statement had
any impact on Gonzalez's tenure?

> 3. As for the flawed statement, the main error lies with the author rather
> than the signees. A statement supposedly written to protect the definition
> of science should have gotten the definition of science right. Only the
> context of rushing to judgement can explain how such an inexcusible error
> could have been made.

Or perhaps some of us are reading too much into the definition of
science as presented here and we should give some grace and attempt to
understand what is being said? But some may be rushing to judgement
for reasons?

> The error may have been unintentional, but it was certainly not innocent.

I am not sure what you mean by not innocent. And what error are we
talking about here.

See how some were already rushing to the conclusion of dishonesty? And
let's avoid blaming the statement for somehow undermining Gonzalez's
tenure.

> Phil

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sat May 26 12:02:50 2007

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat May 26 2007 - 12:02:50 EDT