Re: [asa] Behe on "intervention"

From: Gregory Arago <gregoryarago@yahoo.ca>
Date: Thu Mar 05 2009 - 12:13:36 EST

Hello Bill,
 
Is your objection to 'interference' and 'intervention' also based on on the premise that they imply 'discontinuity'? What I mean is that 'gradualism' and 'continuity' are key aspects of evolutionary biology. Any term that would suggest 'discontinuity' or 'rapidity' (or 'catastrophe' or another concept contrary to 'gradual') would be rejected be Behe in so far as he accepts biological evolution.
 
Perhaps this is also why 'discontinuity' is one of Mike Gene's provocative 4 concepts/percepts?
 
Isn't this also the reason behind Behe's infamous default response of 'Poof' when pressed to respond on the issue at a conference by someone at ASA (wasn't it Ted or Loren)?
 
Gregory

--- On Thu, 3/5/09, William Hamilton <willeugenehamilton@gmail.com> wrote:

From: William Hamilton <willeugenehamilton@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [asa] Behe on "intervention"
To: "Jon Tandy" <tandyland@earthlink.net>
Cc: asa@lists.calvin.edu
Received: Thursday, March 5, 2009, 5:52 PM

I object to "interference" and "intervention". I think
"supervision" or "oversight" would be more appropriate. I'm probably doing
violence to St. Basil here, but I believe he considered nature to be a
mechanism that God commands. We can see the mechanism, but the
commands are perceived only by faith. Thus nature is always doing what
God commands, but we see that only by faith. "Intervention" and
"interference" imply that nature needs to be "fixed up"
when it strays from its intended course.

-- 
William E (Bill) Hamilton Jr., Ph.D.
Member American Scientific Affiliation
Austin, TX
248 821 8156
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 Thu Mar 5 12:14:34 2009

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Mar 05 2009 - 12:14:34 EST