From: Robert Schneider (rjschn39@bellsouth.net)
Date: Tue Sep 16 2003 - 21:25:25 EDT
Allen wrote:
> I thought that when I originally posted this there would be some clouds on
> the horizon. I especially thought that Dick Fisher because this basically
> makes his 10 points against YECs irrelevant to them. The reason why is
that
> all his empirical data is not really empirical at but rather
interpretation
> of data within his paradigm. To the YECs, who start with a different
> paradigm, yet one in which science can just as well be done, Dick's
> interpretations find no reality. The same goes for Glen Morton, who is
> continually saying that YECs ignore empirical facts and data, when in
fact,
> they are simply interpreting the data within their paradigm. So, where's
> the reaction?
>
> Allen
>
Bob's comment:
Ultimately, every paradigm has to stand or fall on those pesky little
things call empirical facts. While paradigms are theory laden and drive the
interpretation of facts, the accumulation of facts that call a particular
paradigm into question may reach such a weight that the paradigm is no
longer sustainable. Thus, the massive amount of empirical data regarding
the age of the earth weighed against a few anomalies, establish the validity
of an ancient age.
I question whether "paradigm" is the right term to use for a form of
science that is overdetermined by a particular interpretation of the Bible
and Genesis. In YEC you have facts and their interpretation tailored to an
interpretation of a sacred text, whereas the evolutionary paradigm is based
solely upon a "reading" i.e. interpretation of nature. The two are not
really the same thing.
Bob Schneider
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Sep 16 2003 - 21:32:16 EDT