Re: CSA review

John W. Burgeson (burgy@compuserve.com)
Fri, 6 Nov 1998 12:29:22 -0500

To: EVOLUTION, Mike and Dave:

Mike Hardie posted:

"Why should any of this, regardless of interpretation, be seen as a problem
for religion -- much less a calculated attack on it? I don't see any sense
in which, say, Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle comments on the truth of
any religious claim."

There seems to be a mindset among YEC people that "modern scientists are
out to get them." I'm sure they would not agree with that statement, but
after 20 years of reading the ICR materials, and others, that is how I
perceive
them. By and large, the YEC people do not like to debate on the LISTSERVs,
although some of their "pupils" often appear on Compuserve in the RELIGION
forum
woefully unprepared for the arguments they encounter there. While I think
them
wrong, I am often pained by how poorly they present the YEC case and how
bloody they get!

The article I posted is a review of Bergman's work by Tom Willis, and
Willis appears to be, if possible, even more "defensive" than Woodmathorpe
(sp).
Like you, I am unaware of any impact on any religious claim by quantum
mechanics; OTOH,
if someone (from any viewpoint) can come up with a competing model that
holds. that
would be highly interesting. I think the possibility slim, but non-zero!

"I personally am given to interpret quantum indeterminacies as epistemic,
rather than metaphysical ones -- that is, they are problems of measurement
and knowledge, not necessarily proof that reality is not causally
determinate at the quantum level. But even if one did believe that quantum
events were strictly undetermined in the metaphysical sense, how would this
impact one's religious sensibilities?"

I personally hold that reality is causally determinate at all levels,
including
the quantum level (how else could it be?) but that non-natural causation
is (often) possible in the case of human intelligence. (Free will).
Possibly also,
to an extent at least, in the case of non-human intelligence. This is a
philosophical
position, not a scientific one; I don't think it is testable in any real
scientific sense.

"I'll note for the record that I'm not religious in any significant sense
myself. I just find the argument above a bit perplexing."

As a Christian, I can join you in this perplexity. But my mind set is
probably closer to yours than to the YEC people! I am frinds, BTW, with
many YEC people; we get along. Some of them "sigh" a lot at me from time to
time! < G > We have this in common; we know that one day our differences
will be resolved and that we will understand these issues in full.

Burgy