Re: Putting evolution to work on the assembly line

Steve Clark (ssclark@facstaff.wisc.edu)
Thu, 23 Jul 1998 10:30:09 -0500

Does this mean that it suits you to use faulty logic?

At 09:16 PM 7/22/98 -0500, Ron Chitwood wrote:
>Suit yourself. I do.
>Ye shall know the Truth, and the Truth
>shall make you free. John 8:32
>Ron Chitwood
>chitw@flash.net
>
>----------
>> From: Steve Clark <ssclark@facstaff.wisc.edu>
>> To: Ron Chitwood <chitw@flash.net>
>> Cc: Calvin Evolution Reflector <evolution@calvin.edu>
>> Subject: Re: Putting evolution to work on the assembly line
>> Date: Wednesday, July 22, 1998 5:43 PM
>>
>> At 04:42 PM 7/22/98 -0500, Ron Chitwood wrote:
>> >You did go into great detail. I was thinking of Sherlock Holmes and his
>> >use of Ockham's Razor. The possibility with the least amount of
>> >possibilities is usually the right one.
>> >
>> >In the case of God vs macroevolutionism, only one unprovable possibility
>is
>> >involved when one says, "God created....". There are 3 unprovable
>> >assumptions that must be made otherwise. 1. Environment was conducive
>to
>> >life, 2.Chance created life, 3. random selection increased the variety.
>>
>> The analogy here is imperfect. Ron compares apples to oranges. Better
>> constructed analogies would either be that "God created..." and "nature
>> created...". Or the following:
>>
>> 1. Environment was conducive to life, 2. Chance created life, 3. Random
>> selection increased the variety.
>>
>> and this
>>
>> 1. God made the environment conducive to life, 2. God created life, 3.
>God
>> increased the variety.
>>
>> I don't think that invoking Ockham's Razor to argue in favor of a
>> creationist position is very compelling.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Steve
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> Steven S. Clark, Ph.D. Ph: 608-263-9137
>> Associate Professor FAX: 263-4226
>> Dept. of Human Oncology ssclark@facstaff.wisc.edu
>> University of Wisconsin
>> School of Medicine
>> 600 Highland Ave
>> Madison, WI 53792
>