--- George Murphy <gmurphy@raex.com> wrote:
>
> & although it sometimes isn't acknowledged, methodological naturalism implies
> a limitation of the competence of science.
Exactly. I think creationists give science too much credit. (So does Richard
Dawkins)
Most obviously, a science limited
> to natural causes cannot explain how nature itself came into being.
Nor can it explain how God continually guides, directs and interacts with
nature -- all in such a way as to be unobservable by the means of science.
When we
> confront that limit, the thing to do is simply to recognize that that limit
> has been encountered & to look to religion if we want to go beyond it. It
> only confuses matters to call that religion "science," as the Kansas school
> board wants to do.
>
And this is an example of giving science too much credit. There is infinitely
more to life than science.
Bill Hamilton
William E. Hamilton, Jr., Ph.D.
586.986.1474 (work) 248.652.4148 (home) 248.303.8651 (mobile)
"...If God is for us, who is against us?" Rom 8:31
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
Received on Tue Jan 10 21:04:03 2006
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Jan 10 2006 - 21:04:03 EST