[asa] Natural Agents - Cause and Effect, Non-Natural Agents - what?

From: Gregory Arago <gregoryarago@yahoo.ca>
Date: Sat Apr 11 2009 - 05:16:42 EDT

Keith Miller wrote:
"the boundaries between the categories above are not at all clear to me."
The boundaries as he defined them are: 'volitional agents,' 'living agents,' and 'nonliving natural entities.'
Keith continued:
"Some may argue that humans are non-natural agents. In fact many ID advocates equate humans and supernatural agents as scientifically equivalent."

I think this is where ID becomes silly. Easter Island, Mt. Rushmore, mousetrap, the Victoria, Canada flowerbed welcome (i.e. flowers planted to display 'Welcome to Victoria'), etc. all are examples of what Keith is saying. IDists have not successfully distinguished between human agency and supernatural agency.
But neither have TEs or ECs in North America!!
Again, Keith writes:
"human[s] are natural agents. They are part of this material world that can be studied using the tools of science, and whose actions in the past can be reconstructed."
Yes, so the material aspect of humans constitute their 'nature,' if I understand you. And then what do their non-material aspects constitute? Again, I ask you about the non-natural features of human existence because you seem to focus mainly on the natural. I and my colleagues use an alternate language, which we also call 'scientific'.
I agree fully with Keith's opposition to the claim:
"science can investigate the supernatural, since it can investigate human action."
Ironically, I think Keith will find that every major ID 'theorist' agrees with this.
"If humans possess a non-material spirit or soul, this does not make them non-natural agents. It would simply mean that humans possess an aspect of their being which transcends scientific description, and would lay outside the ability of science to investigate." - Keith Miller
Oh yes, this is juicy!) What would it make human beings if we "possess a non-material spirit or soul"? Would it make us natural-plus? Would it make us 'more than just natural'? This is exactly the point I care to understand. I feel that Keith is asking the right questions and also offering things that transcend science in a bid to counter the blatant 'scientism' (or call it hyper-science) of our era (or better said, of the era that ended not long ago). We are now moving beyond 'scientism' and trying to find a language appropriate to do so. Keith's attempts certainly help us to do this!
"Natural agents are events or processes that have a cause-and-effect link to a subsequent event or process." - Keith
What link(s) do non-natural agents have?
Sincere regards,
Gregory __________________________________________________________________ Ask a question on any topic and get answers from real people. Go to Yahoo! Answers and share what you know at http://ca.answers.yahoo.com

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sat Apr 11 05:17:10 2009

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat Apr 11 2009 - 05:17:10 EDT