Re: [asa] Behe's Math... was Arrogance

From: PvM <pvm.pandas@gmail.com>
Date: Fri Aug 31 2007 - 00:24:28 EDT

You're funny. Repented from his excesses... A the smell of hypocrisy in the
morning. It's not that I do not want to admit anything positive about the
intelligent design theory, it's that it has nothing positive to offer. Just
because proponents are Christians, does not make their work exempt from
scientific criticism.

That you have 'challenged' me on something I do not hold only serves to
undermine your actions. I am sorry to hear that you are still reducing my
claims to your silly strawmen.

Since you are willing to cast the first stone, I may invite you to present
what you have done lately?

I of course understand why you would appeal to ASA rather than to your own
efforts. Laziness is no excuse, if you feel that there is something wrong
with my contributions then present them in a coherent manner. May I suggest
you refrain from your usual approaches. I have found that reason, logic and
supporting evidence can be a very convincing approach to presenting you
case. Whining seldomly is.

I also wonder if this is the kind of Christian fellowship that ASA wants to
embrace? I personally do not mind Gregory's comments as they serve as a
constant reminder to our follies.

Why continue to highlight critics of ID? Because they come from a wide
variety of backgrounds and all have come to understand not only its
scientific irrelevance but also its significant theological risks.

Sigh...

On 8/30/07, Gregory Arago <gregoryarago@yahoo.ca> wrote:
>
> Hello David,
>
> The issue is not whether or not paying attention to criticism is
> useful. (Of course it is, and I do it also as you do.) Pim has never
> repented from his excesses and will not, from all appearances, admit of
> anything, let me say it louder, ANYTHING positive about intelligent design
> theory or the movement of scholars and scientists associated with ID, many
> of whom are Christians. He simply condemns them across the board as ignorant
> and worse, as deceptive. I for one disagree, and further have challenged Pim
> on his 'universal evolutionism.' He has never, not once repented or
> expressed a glimpse of humility, but rather flaunted Science as if it (and
> he as its messenger) holds all the answers of the meaning, purpose and value
> of human existence (using St. Augustine as his personal theological
> message).
>
> My question remains unanswered: why continue to highlight critics of ID
> who are anti-theists, even for their 'scientific' value, if it contradicts
> the cause of Christendom? Why not highlight the work of Christian scholars
> and scientists on the topic of altruism instead of socio-biologists and
> evolutionary psychologists? Again, why not? It is one thing to be kept
> abreast of criticisms from anti-theists and another thing to use those views
> as a platform for one's own obviously obsessive criticisms of intelligent
> design theories. I must agree with those here who ask why Pim doesn't
> actually contribute something instead of propogandizing the criticisms of
> others. Even if he doesn't agree with Meyers, Dawkins and Avalos, where is
> Pim's contribution to knowledge? Can ASA not call Pim to account instead of
> listening to repetitive criticisms which have been heard ad nauseam as
> nothing more than anti-ID plus news about anti-ID and nothing more? Instead,
> if he should commit a positive Christian contribution, it would likely be
> welcomed.
>
> Sincerely,
> Gregory
>
>
> *David Opderbeck <dopderbeck@gmail.com>* wrote:
>
> I'm going to partly agree with Pim here. It is useful for us to pay
> attention to criticism and sometimes to repent of things that have lead to
> legitimate criticism (see Merold Westphal's "Suspicion & Faith: The
> Religious Uses of Atheism" for some good examples of this).
>
> But there is a difference between listening to and learning from critics
> and lacking discernment when critics are making arguments that are
> overreaching and unfair or endorsing the critics' ultimate conclusions.
> It's one thing to let folks like Meyers, Dawkins and Avalos provoke
> reflection; it's another to essentially agree with their twisted assessment
> of Christianity and religious faith.
>
>
> On 8/30/07, PvM <pvm.pandas@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > The real question is do YOU NOT visit such places to understand 'the
> > rest of the story'? But regardless of the anti-theistic nature of
> > Myers, his blog contains excellent contributions to science.
> >
> > As to your final question, the answer is simple: Not enough time and
> > priority.
> >
> > What I find interesting is how a posting in which I show the vacuity
> > of Behe's claims, somehow is turned into a whining session about them
> > mean atheists. Come on guys, is this the best we can do when
> > confronted with this 'nonsense' by Christians?
> >
> > John Walley asks
> >
> > <quote>I'm curious, in your worldview, is this a good thing and is
> > this the logical outcome for our kids from having an understanding of
> > true science free from religious prejudices and the scientific vacuity
> > of ID?
> >
> > As a Christian Pim, do you not feel the need to also counter some of
> > the atheist prejudices of PZ and others? Would you consider that this
> > is a symptom of moral or spiritual vacuity and what should we do about
> > this in our society?
> > </quote>
> >
> > I am not sure what atheist prejudices you have in mind. I do not care
> > too much about what atheists have to say about religion, why should I.
> > Is Skatje's decision to start a atheistic-humanistic club at her
> > university a good thing or even a logical outcome ? Certainly the
> > scientific vacuity of ID may lead some to come to flawed conclusions
> > about Christianity but in the end, Christianity has nothing to fear of
> > science. Is it a logical outcome, perhaps, it is a necessary outcome,
> > of course not.
> > My focus at this moment is on science, and the cost to science (and
> > faith) of actions of Christians.
> >
> > Examples include global warming and the human cause deniers, who seem
> > to be intent on ignoring good science in favor of ... what exactly?
> > Other examples include YECism, and most varieties of intelligent
> > design.
> > Or in this thread, the embarassing actions of Janice who seems to
> > have abandoned any attempt to portray herself as a Christian.
> > Is it worth it Janice?
> >
> >
> >
> > On 8/30/07, Gregory Arago <gregoryarago@yahoo.ca> wrote:
> > > Do you actually visit such places on the internet that put out
> > anti-theistic
> > > rhetoric regularly PIM? You still haven't taken up my challenge to
> > give
> > > voice to Christian views of altruism instead of those of
> > sociobiologists and
> > > evolutionary psychologists. One might wonder: why not?
> > >
> >
> > To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
> > "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
> >
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> *Yahoo! Canada Toolbar :* Search from anywhere on the web and bookmark
> your favourite sites. Download it now! <http://ca.toolbar.yahoo.com/>
>
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Fri Aug 31 00:24:44 2007

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Aug 31 2007 - 00:24:45 EDT