Re: definition of science (Dooyeweerd)

Here's my limited defense of ID. When I "debate" these guys, I always
give this in principle acceptance of the idea. I don't think there is
any empirical evidence to support conclusions along these lines, but
I don't rule it out that it is somehow unscientific in principle. If
what ID is talking about is what I'm describing below, then we can
easily do science (in fact, we already do in as much as disciplines
are autonomous) in some of these terms.

This flows out of what you might call a Dooyeweerdian "Reformed"
philosophy. Look at the PSCF/JASA indicies if you want to find out
some more about that. There have been a few ASA members (some
associated with Calvin College, but others as well) who operate in
this framework.

Let's suppose that God's lawful creational governing is inherently
anti-reductionist. That there's one set of laws that governs physical
things. Another set of laws that governs biological things. Another
set of laws that governs psychological things. Another set of laws
that governs sociological things. Another set of laws that governs
economic things. Etc. Etc. Etc. This, of course, is a much rich
ontology than we are used to. There's lots of provisos and
explanations that must be given to explain all this. If you're brave,
you can tackle Dooyeweerd's *New Critique of Theoretical Thought* or
some of the "condensations", say Kalsbeek's *Contours of a Christian
Philosophy*. One important proviso that must be made to squelch any
initial objections is that the "higher" order law structures build up
on and encapsulate the lower level structures. In other words, one
cannot simply use the fact that biological systems are composed
entirely (in their substances) of physical/chemical things.

Now what would this look like empirically, especially in biology. As
I've grappled with this philosophical system, I've thought that our
theorizing about a continuity between the physical/chemical to
explain the biological would hit a brick wall. Some other creational
law--say laws of biology are necessary to explain the inherently and
irreducible biological phenomena. For example, information and
organization in biological systems are on the biology side--physics
and chemistry are used, but they can't produce, outside of the
biological system, such information and organization. I'm not sure
that the Dooyeweerdian biologist is inherently anti-evolutionary or
anti-Darwinian, although many are, but they would be very much open
to the idea that life cannot emerge from non-life based on
physical/chemical properties alone. I'm not totally sure how to
express it--perhaps some Dooyeweerdian experts can help here. But the
law structure that produces the biological aspect of creation is
different from the physical/chemical law structures. This, I think,
is similar to the idea of ID, although, in my opinion, much more
subtly stated. In a non-creationist environment, you don't have to
argue that these biological (or other higher order) laws are divinely
implement--they are just the way the world works (and we discover
them empirically, just they way we discover physical/chemical laws).

We seem to be leaning toward a materialist, reductionistic view of
science where the physicists are the only ones who can really call
what they do science. Of all people, Christian scientists ought to be
open to a richer ontology of creation than materialism and
reductionism has to offer. Although I don't personally like to use
the term, the concept of methodological naturalism can apply here as
long as we don't equate natural with the material and reducible to
chemistry and physics. Natural is simply the way things work--if
there's an irreducible "gap" between biology and chemistry then that
is natural. I prefer the term "creational" to natural, but I don't
object to the term "natural" unless it is filled with
"anti-creational" meaning.

TG

-- 
_________________
Terry M. Gray, Ph.D., Computer Support Scientist
Chemistry Department, Colorado State University
Fort Collins, Colorado  80523
grayt@lamar.colostate.edu  http://www.chm.colostate.edu/~grayt/
phone: 970-491-7003 fax: 970-491-1801