A very good reply by Jim, methinks. I would certainly agree that the
economy is robust, it can respond to and survive minor fluctuations,
and that its general features were designed. My idea was that no one,
including Adam Smith, could foresee any specifics about how the
economy would evolve nor could they foresee our specific economy
today. In other words, our present economy was neither foreseen
nor designed. It is for this reason that I said it did not fit in with
the TE conception of design, however, on reflection it is possible
that it does fit some TE's ideas of design. My idea of TE is that
God designed a robust system capable of evolving, yet also foresaw
the consequences through time to the appearance of man.
But just because the economy is robust and adaptable doesn't mean
it isn't irreducibly complex. Biological systems are also robust and
adaptable.
Brian Harper | "If you don't understand
Associate Professor | something and want to
Applied Mechanics | sound profound, use the
The Ohio State University | word 'entropy'"
| -- Morrowitz
Bastion for the naturalistic |
rulers of science |