>======================================================================
>
>I quite agree with this, especially the last sentence, provided that we
>understand that "evolution" is the mechanism by which living things arise
>and develop over time, and does *not* include metaphysical assumptions that
>are often smuggled into the theory.
I fully concur. The metaphysical attachment is a statement of one's
worldview and is not a necessary conclusion from the science of evolution.
However, an evolutionary mechanism is consistent with such a world view, yet
the mechanism is not inconsistent with an intelligent design world view.
>
>If one were to admit that we can and have recognized "design in nature", that
>would not be evidence against evolution per se, but it *would* IMO count
>as evidence against that version of "evolutionism" which holds that the process
>is undirected and unanticipated. Of course this is exactly the way the theory
>is interpreted and explained by Dawkins, Gould, et al., and the way it
>is understood by the majority of practicing scientists, and many in the
>general public.
This is also the way evolution is understood by those Christians who
ardently oppose the model. But to argue against this mechanistic model
because some people attach a particular and unwarranted worldview to it, is
to throw the proverbial baby out with the bathwater.
So a "recognition of design in nature", if substantiated,
>would be (at least) quite significant for a proper interpretation of
evolution.
But design, like undirected "evolutionism" is a world view that is neither
supported or refuted by the mechanistic evolution model. One does not need
to invoke either the design or adirectional paradigms for a "proper"
understanding of the mechanistic model that is evolution. Rather, I believe
that both sides need to understand that because the model is consistent with
both world view paradigms, the accuracy of the model does not threaten
either world view.
>I really think this is one of Behe's main points, Steve. Do you agree?
It seems to me that Mike is more concerned about the accuracy of the
mechanistic model then he is about the attendant world views.
Steve
_________________________________________________________
Steven S. Clark, Ph.D . Phone: 608/263-9137
Associate Professor FAX: 608/263-4226
Dept. of Human Oncology and Email: ssclark@facstaff.wisc.edu
UW Comprehensive Cancer Center
CSC K4-432
600 Highland Ave.
Madison, WI 53792
"It is the glory of God to conceal a matter, but the glory of kings to
search out a matter." Proverbs
________________________________________________________