Re: supernatural observation & faith def.
Stephen Gooch (sgooch@sm10.sciatl.com)
Mon, 30 Sep 1996 12:15:05 -0400PN>TM>So, the question I asked, is it useful? If, and only if, there is any
PN>TM>chance of determining if it is design and who designed it in an objective
PN>TM>fashion. The alien hypothesis, at least, has the potential to meet these
PN>TMcriteria. ID, in the supernatural sense, does not.
PN>
PN>If ID "in the supernatural sense" is, in principle, empirically empty, then
PN>what was Darwin doing in the _Origin of Species_?
PN>
PN>"He who believes that each being has been created as we now see it,
PN>must occasionally have felt surprise when he has met with an animal
PN>having habits and structure not at all in agreement. What can be plainer
PN>than that the webbed feet of ducks and geese are formed for swimming?
PN>yet there are upland geese with webbed feet which rarely or never go
PN>near the water..." (_Origin of Species_ [1859, 185])
I don't understand your argument. Darwin is writing about a rudimentary
feature, kinda like - why do us guys have nipples. How do you get from that to
ID is useful?
-- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Stephen Gooch stephen.gooch@asu.edu 770.903.6778 || 602.891.2300 || 800.388.6242*2300