Re: Evagelical ID

From: Bjoern Moeller (dj_mic20@yahoo.com)
Date: Mon May 14 2001 - 17:10:21 EDT

  • Next message: James Mahaffy: "Re: Evagelical ID"

    --- george murphy <gmurphy@raex.com> wrote:

    >> First, there is something seriously wrong
    if
    > apologetics is
    > taught by people whose primary qualification is that
    > they are
    > "well-trained philosophers". Certainly such
    > teachers should have some
    > philosophical competence, but apologetics is first
    > of all a
    > _theological_ enterprise which (like all theology)
    > makes use of
    > philosophy as one of its tools.
    > Perhaps you simply meant that the teachers
    > of this class are
    > theologians who are trained in philosophy.

    You are perfectly right, the teachers are both
    theologians and philosophers, although those that
    teach this specific course are the philosophers among
    the theologians, i.e., they have their MDivs, but
    their PhDs are in philosophy.

    The
    > previous paragraph is
    > then inapplicable, but I would add that it is at
    > least as important,
    > especially if arguments about design & evolution are
    > major parts of the
    > discussion, that the teachers have expertise in
    > science as in
    > philosophy.

    Perhaps this is the real problem here, they aren't
    scientists.

    Bjorn Moller

    dj_mic20@yahoo.com

    __________________________________________________
    Do You Yahoo!?
    Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
    http://auctions.yahoo.com/



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon May 14 2001 - 17:10:30 EDT