Re: textbook problems, from Cobb County...

Ted wrote:

> The Miller, in Miller and Levine, is the same Ken Miller who wrote
> Finding
> Darwin's God. It's statements like this (and some others), when taken
> together with his comments against "philosophical materialism" and in
> favor
> of theism, that give his readers cognitive dissonance. Will the real
> Ken
> Miller please stand up?

The problem is suspect is one of terminology. I don't know whether or
not he uses terms such as "philosophical materialism" consistently
between the textbook and in "Finding Darwin's God." He very well might
be. Different people use different terms to describe the limitation of
scientific inquiry to natural cause-and-effect processes. Some use
"methodological naturalism," some use "methodological atheism," some
use "philosophical materialism," etc. But it is important to know
what the writer using those terms means. They simply don't have
consistent meanings from person to person.

I have absolutely no doubt about Ken's rejection of science as a tool
for promoting an atheistic or materialistic worldview. He has made his
rejection of that abundantly clear. However, he is not a philosopher
or a theologian (nor am I) and his statements in those areas are
sometimes unclear and not rigorously thought out. I am sure that is
also the case with some of my thoughts and writing as well. That is
the downside of stepping outside of ones scholarly training. But Ken
has done what other Christians in the sciences have been much too slow
in doing -- going public with their faith and their own science/faith
integration. Ken is working though theological issues, as we all are.

If people are concerned about apparent ambiguity in his writing then
talk to him about it. We can all use help in having our communication
clarified. But do not doubt his Christian faith -- I have enjoyed
talking with him, and sharing the platform with him, on several
occasions.

Keith
Received on Mon Jan 31 10:21:10 2005