RE: Phillip Johnson (and Methodological Naturalism)

From: Alexanian, Moorad (alexanian@uncw.edu)
Date: Thu Oct 16 2003 - 12:12:31 EDT

  • Next message: Alexanian, Moorad: "RE: Phillip Johnson (and Methodological Naturalism)"

    I am not sure if life can be defined in terms of purely physical terms.
    Therefore, humans as well as animals are in some sense outside the realm
    of theories that are based solely of matter/energy. I do not think that
    the notion of being a sinner can ever be applied to animals. Therefore,
    conscious beings that reason have to have this added feature of being
    aware of their sin nature via some sort of morality that does not exist
    in other living beings. In Christian theology we humans are
    spirit/mind/body. I think animals are mind/body and so have no way of
    "detecting" God.

     

    Moorad

     

    -----Original Message-----
    From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
    Behalf Of SHEILA WILSON
    Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 9:31 AM
    To: asa@calvin.edu
    Subject: RE: Phillip Johnson (and Methodological Naturalism)

     

    This is a great question but it is a two-edged sword that clearly
    reveals the more challenging side. If intelligence, consciousness, and
    rationality in humans cannot be measured or derived from scientific
    theories, how do we know that animals and plants do not also have these
    traits? If they have these traits, then are they sentient or
    self-aware? If self-aware, then why do we consider ourselves better
    than them?

     

    Remember, I am Christian. I have accepted Jesus Christ as my Savior. I
    know that mankind was created different than animals. I am not a
    humanist. This train of thought, however, is a slipperly slope that has
    led many to destruction. More questions:

     

    Do animals have a moral system dictating right from wrong? Are animals
    intelligent and self-aware? Many say yes to both of these. How then
    are we different? Do we have a soul and animals do not? What is a
    soul? How does God define our souls? How are we different?

     

    Howard says that glaciers and moraines are not intelligently made. Why
    not? God is the author and finisher of our faith. God is the Creator
    of all things - why not glaciers and moraines? Are only living things
    intelligently made? What about our planet or our universe? God is the
    God of the infinite and the finite, the great and the small. If He
    knows how many hairs are on my head and I was wonderfully and fearfully
    made, why not moraines? Even the rocks will cry out the glory of God!

     

    Sheila

     

    "Alexanian, Moorad" <alexanian@uncw.edu> wrote:

            Perhaps someone can answer a simple question. Intelligence in
    humans,
            based on consciousness and rationality, is not part of the
    physical
            universe and cannot be derived from scientific theories.
    Therefore, if
            such is needed in order to do unadulterated science, then whence
    does
            that intelligence come from? Isn't this the reason for supposing
    the
            existence of a being which is infinitely, compared to humans,
    more
            conscious and rational? Isn't that what ID is all about?
            
            Moorad
            
            
            -----Original Message-----
            From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu
    [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
            Behalf Of Howard J. Van Till
            Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 8:12 AM
            To: Michael Roberts; asa@calvin.edu
            Subject: Re: Phillip Johnson (and Methodological Naturalism)
            
    >From: "Michael Roberts"
            
    > If the Ice ! Age was the result of the Flood then Glaciers and
    Moraines
            can be
    > seen to be intelligently designed
            
            Michael,
            
            Well, not exactly. Here's the problem. The pattern set by ID
    advocates
            seems
            to be that inanimate objects like stars and planets (which, I
    presume,
            include glaciers and moraines) are labeled "intelligently
    designed" when
            they are formed as a consequence of a robust (& fine-tuned)
    system of
            natural formational capabilities. Biotic things, on the other
    hand, are
            labeled "intelligently designed" when the system of natural
    capabilities
            is
            inadequate to do the job and needs to be supplemented by
    occasional
            episodes
            of non-natural form-imposing intervention by an unidentified,
            unembodied,
            choice-making agent who need not be God.
            
            So, sorry, but your glaciers and moraines can't be intelligently
            designed :)
            
            Howard Van Till

    Sheila McGinty Wilson
    sheila-wilson@sbcglobal.net



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Oct 16 2003 - 12:12:55 EDT