Re: intelligent design

From: Bryan R. Cross (crossbr@SLU.EDU)
Date: Wed Jul 05 2000 - 14:01:32 EDT

  • Next message: David Campbell: "Junk DNA"

    Wendee Holtcamp wrote:

    > . . . My answer (if that is indeed your position) is (1) The main way I
    > meld
    > the two ideas of both Darwinian selection, and God's involvement in
    > creation is that God's hand must be involved in each mutation. . . .

    What does "involved" mean? Caused? If so, in what way did God cause each
    mutation? Did He cause entities to behave within the limits of their
    natural properties and thus strictly follow the physical and stochastic
    laws or not?

    If *so*, then unless one simply (and unjustifiably) assumes a continuous,
    uninterrupted and very steep positive selection slope (i.e. which, being
    continuous, requires that one assume that there is no irreducible
    complexity), there very well may not have been enough time between the
    formation of life and the appearance of such features as the trilobite eye
    to produce such staggering complexity.

    If *not*, then at this point, intelligent design by natural causes (IDNC)
    looks very much like intelligent design by direct action (IDDA).

    - Bryan



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jul 05 2000 - 14:01:36 EDT