Re: [asa] Stupid/Dumb Science and Intelligent/Intelligence Science

From: <mlucid@aol.com>
Date: Sun Oct 21 2007 - 00:04:45 EDT

Wait you two!  You're both right!  It's a floor wax and a dessert topping!  (or breath
mint and a candy mint for you (us) older boomers). 
 

>>Of course, that ID is merely the set theoretic complement of regularity
>>and chance shows that 'design' is not an explanation but rather a
>>position of ignorance based on the fact that science cannot (yet)
>>explain a particular feature.

ID is just the reaction of people of faith to the shrinking down of
Creation into purely rational terms when they instinctively know that
it is far more involved than we will ever know.

>This sounds like the modern day equivalent of the Pharisees rationalizing
>and dismissing the miracles of Jesus. God is the author of our natural laws
>and He chose exceptions to these laws that he worked at His will to be a
>testimony to Him.

Well, John, here's an excerpt from my book on the subject. I hope it helps
balance the issue a little, or at least get both sides forget each other and
vent their frustrations on me instead. It's out of context of the preceding
chapters, but you'll get the gist of it.

(The following is an excerpt from "The God of Reason" Copyright 2006 by Michael G. Harmon)

The latest “evolution” of this fundamentalist argument
for a naively simplistic notion of the hand of God is called
“intelligent design”.  Both parties are
up to their same old futile strategies. 
Proponents of intelligent design propose that certain aspects of reality
are far too rationally exquisite to have happened randomly, the implication
being that there has to be a Creator behind it all.  They say this without understanding the first
thing about how pathetically inadequate our human concept of “intelligence” or
“to create” is, compared to the immanent, transcendent, infinite potential of
the Creator of the infinite context of all things seen and unseen.  Of
course, the origin of Creation is intelligent.  It’s not just an intelligent design.  It is a design that is more intelligent than
we will ever hope to comprehend, much less describe.  It is just one finite speck of local creation
from which we derive our comparatively imbecilic concept of what “intelligence”
might truly be. 

On the other side of the coin, the most ardent rational
opponents to the theory of intelligent design arrogantly presume that they know
enough about evolution, quantum science, and cosmology to discount the notion
that anything could be intuited as being of greater intelligence than what they
themselves can describe.  Some of these
so-called men of knowledge act as if the infinite rational symmetry which they
eternally pursue is somehow not “intelligent” until they discover and
characterize it.  Of course, everything in the symmetrical Universe of infinite
Creation is intelligently manifest.  We
are but a miniscule residue of the unfathomable “intelligence” of
Creation.  Creation is not just
intelligently manifest; it is more intelligently manifest than we can ever know
or describe, whether as scientist or religious devotee.  The proper assertion for both scientists and
Creationists is to claim evolution science as an accurate
but very narrow subset of Creationism, the full character and extent of which
are forever beyond any human capacity to fathom.

(End of excerpted material)

Evolution science is good science.   Creation faith is good faith.  

-Mike

 

________________________________________________________________________
Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check out free AOL Mail! - http://mail.aol.com

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sun Oct 21 00:05:33 2007

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Oct 21 2007 - 00:05:33 EDT