In a message dated 4/27/01 9:26:42 AM, hvantill@novagate.com writes:
<< > I conclude that there is no a priori reason provided to suppose
> that design events must have stopped or, at least, that we shouldn't
> consider the possibility that a designer could remain active.
In the context of this exchange, I presume that the term "design events"
really means "events in which a non-natural Agent, acting in the manner of
some an artisan, crafts/assemble particular new organism or biotic
subsystem," and that the term "designer" really means "extra-natural,
form-conferring Agent." >>
Howard,
I do not see "design events" (which is Tim's term, not mine) to be either-or
events, i.e., either by natural agents or non-natural ones. I suggest that a
better conceptual approach is "both-and", somewhat in the way that multiple
variables are studied in the social sciences by analysis of variance.
Somehow we need to devise methods for sorting out non-natural and natural
agents in a given phenomenon and if possible assessing the contribution of
each agent. If, however, you are unwilling to grant legitimacy to
non-natural agents, then this proposal would not seem to make sense to you.
How to identify intelligent causes is, of course, the big problem. Let me
suggest that reverse engineering holds some promise. As biological systems
are increasingly being described in mechanical terminology--the cell as a
factory, biological motors, etc.--it should be possible to develop something
like a flow chart on how the system was assembled, what parts were used, and
where they came from. This would have to be done non-defensively, with no
preconception that ID did it all, or that evolution did it all.
From this it would perhaps be possible to determine at what points new
information had to be infused into the system for the assembly to go forward.
These would most likely be those points in which the experimenter had to
intervene. From this it might be possible to determine the differential
contribution of natural agents, (where the assembly ran smoothly with no
intervention) and the contribution of outside intelligence to the total
result.
Your portrayal of divine action as "artisan, crafts/assembler" makes it sound
pretty ham-handed. How about Polyani's "profoundly informative intervention"
where the emphasis is on information rather than artisanship?
Regards,
Bob
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed May 02 2001 - 07:37:22 EDT