Steve C:
>Why do we have to recognize these qualities of life through
>science. Scientists do not ignore them, we just have no experiments to
>test them with. They are better appreciated and understood using other
>ways of knowing.
Bertvan:
Hi Steve, If science has no way of dealing with those aspects of life that
distinguish it from non-life (free will, consciousness, intelligence,
purpose, creativity, spontaneity and choice), it might be prudent for science
to be a little more tolerant of other peoples thoughts on the subject. As it
is, biology is the only science that asks the courts to enforce a ruling that
only their explanation of life's diversity be taught in schools. I have
observed that intolerance is often the product of insecurity. If Darwinists
were all that secure, they wouldn't worry about conflicting theories such as
ID. ID may never be proved, but eventually even a majority of scientists may
come to accept it as obvious.
Perhaps ways will be found to test some of the qualities of living things.
We will never see free will, just as we will never see gravity. However I
think evidence might be developed showing that free will can affect the
world of matter. In my opinion bio feed back has already shown that.
Further, I would argue there is only one "way of knowing". Some things we
"know" can be proved and others can't, but even beliefs that were once
accepted as proved were later replaced with more sophisticated
understanding.
Bertvan
http://members.aol.com/bertvan
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jun 06 2000 - 14:10:26 EDT