From: George Murphy (gmurphy@raex.com)
Date: Fri Oct 10 2003 - 15:52:09 EDT
Ted Davis wrote:
.............................
> Ted: How does Phil propose that we do natural science? That's a good
> question that I won't try to answer for him--many critics of ID would like
> to see it answered. In vague terms, however, I think he would say, "not
> entirely naturalistically," in other words to have a science in which "the
> design inference" can and will be made, by scientists themselves and within
> science itself and not simply in philosophy or theology.
& once the "design inference" is made - what? Do we investigate the designer
(i.e., God) by the methods - or Phil's methods - of natural science? Or do we just stop
at that point? Maybe there are other possibilities but I can't think of them.
(I am, of course, speking of topics to which the "design inference" is germane.
Of course many areas of research might be unaffected by admission of such an inference.)
Shalom,
George
-- George L. Murphy gmurphy@raex.com http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Oct 10 2003 - 15:53:51 EDT