Re: The Wedge of Truth : Splitting the Foundations of Naturalism byPhillip E...

From: Howard J. Van Till (hvantill@novagate.com)
Date: Thu Jun 29 2000 - 08:20:16 EDT

  • Next message: Bryan Cross: "Re: The Wedge of Truth : Splitting the Foundations of NaturalismbyPhillip E..."

    But Ockham's razor must be used by whole persons with the requisite skill
    and breadth of vision. If wielded by the scant of skill or vision it can cut
    off the very considerations that give meaning to the entirety of life's
    experiences.

    Howard Van Till

    ----------
    >From: "Bryan R. Cross" <crossbr@SLU.EDU>
    >

    > Unfortunately, such a teleology is readily subject to Ockham's razor,
    surviving
    > only in the rather anemic form as a human projection onto reality a la
    Dennett's
    > 'intentional stance'.
    >
    > - Bryan
    >
    >
    > Cmekve@aol.com wrote:
    >
    >> In a message dated 6/27/00 9:25:19 AM Mountain Standard Time,
    >> bivalve@email.unc.edu writes:
    >>
    >> [snip]
    >> << A scientific explanation, such as
    >> biological evolution, should be considered an attempt at describing how God
    >> normally does things. A description of how God does things is not valid
    >> evidence against God being involved. Evolution is actually a smart design
    >> for dealing with certain problems.
    >>
    >> David C. >>
    >>
    >> Quite so. As B.B. Warfield put it nearly a century ago:
    >> "...teleology is in no way inconsistent with...a complete system of natural
    >> causation. Every teleological system implies a COMPLETE 'causo-mechanical'
    >> explanation as its instrument." [emphasis added]
    >>
    >> Karl
    >> *****************************
    >> Karl V. Evans
    >> cmekve@aol.com
    >



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jun 29 2000 - 08:24:51 EDT