Re: Kansas Closing arguments

On Wed, 18 May 2005 14:09:14 -0400 "Alexanian, Moorad"
<alexanian@uncw.edu> writes:
> Philosophy of science applies equally to biology and the physical
> sciences. In fact, it is the hope of some to reduce biology to
> physics. I have a qualm with the term "natural causes." Nature is
> made up of physical and nonphysical aspects. For instance, human
> consciousness and rationality are nonphysical. Can the nonphysical
> aspect of nature serve as cause to the physical laws of nature? I do
> not think so.
>
>
>
> Moorad
>
Second sentence is about emergence. I have encountered a defense of this
view both from materialistic and trom theistic sources. I also recall a
denial from a materialist. In other words, it is irrelevant to
establishing a philosophical position.

Your last two sentences apparently represent your dogma. However, I am
not sure how to take the claims. Are you claiming that mental "forces"
cannot cause physical events, or that the mental cannot create the
physical? Ambiguity and over-simplification are great aids to
establishing an "irrefutable" position.

I have to agree with Michael that there is little hope in bringhing you
around. But there is a chance of keeping others from swallowing your
line.
Dave
Received on Wed May 18 14:47:48 2005