Re: Ken Miller talk at Case Western

I wrote to Ken yesterday & he said politely that he isn't interested in
membership at this time. I hope he doesn't get deluged with invitations.

Shalom
George
http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/

----- Original Message -----
From: "Dick Fischer" <dickfischer@verizon.net>
To: "ASA" <asa@calvin.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2006 10:48 PM
Subject: RE: Ken Miller talk at Case Western

> Ken was at one of our annual conferences when "Pandas" was first foisted
> off on an unwitting public and it was debated there. He had a baseball
> cap with ASA (American Softball Association) on it that he wore during
> his presentation in opposition to the book. So he knows who we are,
> whether he would want to become one of us I don't know.
>
> Dick Fischer
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
> Behalf Of George Murphy
> Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2006 11:57 AM
> To: Clarke Morledge; Freeman, Louise Margaret
> Cc: asa@calvin.edu
> Subject: Re: Ken Miller talk at Case Western
>
> I've just sent Ken Miller an email suggesting that he might check out
> ASA at
> our website.
>
> I don't know if any ID proponents were at his talk but if they were they
>
> kept quiet. Someone told me that he thought that there might be an AiG
> rep
> present (there was for a conference we had on evolution, ID &c at CWRU
> in
> October '04 at which Ken was also a speaker) but if there was he didn't
> advertise himself.
>
> Actually methodological naturalism doesn't require one to reject
> astrology.
> It can be presented as naturalistic science, but of course then it's
> just
> very bad science, & has been seen to be so for centuries. At the same
> time
> we have to recognize that in reality astrology generally has had a
> religious
> component, especially when it's taken seriously today as part of New Age
>
> thought.
>
> Shalom
> George
> http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Clarke Morledge" <chmorl@wm.edu>
> To: "Freeman, Louise Margaret" <lfreeman@mbc.edu>
> Cc: <asa@calvin.edu>
> Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2006 11:13 AM
> Subject: Re: Ken Miller talk at Case Western
>
>
>> Louise,
>>
>> I did see the video of Ken Miller's presentation. Very well done. I
> have
>> a few comments to make and questions to ask on the list:
>>
>> (1) Is Ken Miller a member of ASA? If not, we need to recruit him :-)
> He
>> has a very persuasive and cordial style of presentation, even in the
> midst
>> of a very controversial topic. Maybe he gets his unflappable nature
> from
>> being a baseball umpire ;-)
>>
>> (2) The audience seemed to be pretty overwhelming anti-ID. Maybe all
> the
>> ID'ers were slumped down in their seats or something, but it was
> curious
>> to note that there was no serious rebuttal in the form of questions
> from
>> the audience.
>>
>> (3) There was a lot of laughter regarding Michael Behe's comment
> during
>> the Dover trial that astrology might be considered as science. I
> chuckled
>> too, but it does raise questions as to how we relate to the historical
>
>> development of science. It is tempting just to write off something
> with a
>> sense of chronological snobbery. But would we really have astronomy
> today
>> without some of the questions first raised by astrology? Would we
> have
>> chemistry today without some of the questions raised by alchemy?
>>
>> (4) I appreciated Miller noting that challenges to science come from
> both
>> the political right AND the political left. For example, Miller
> talked
>> about an anti-science sentiment coming from some European leftist
>> movements.
>>
>> (5) Miller was quick to point out that he does not want to tout his
> Roman
>> Catholicism. On the other hand, it would have been helpful to hear
>> something of his spiritual testimony. Miller may not think that a
> witness
>> to his faith is appropriate to the discussion. Nevertheless, it may
> help
>> those who are convinced that practicing evolutionary scientists are
>> nothing but atheists or religious liberals.
>>
>> (6) Miller argued that cultural critique helps to motivate the ID
>> movement. ID proponents have argued that methodological naturalism is
>
>> *essentially* tied to philosophical naturalism. Therefore, Darwinism,
> as
>> the chief example of methodological/philosophical naturalism , is
>> responsible for the decay of Western morals and decline of the
> traditional
>> family.
>>
>> I was disappointed that Miller just sort of left that there. I
> suppose
>> Miller was just trying to keep the discussion focused on the nature of
>
>> science. But if indeed the cultural critique offered by Phillip
> Johnson
>> is *the* (if not simply "a") driving force behind ID, then it would
> make
>> sense to directly address it. Otherwise, public pleas to uphold the
>> integrity of science simply will fall on the deaf hears of those who
>> already accept Johnson's cultural critique.
>>
>> Many Christians today (like myself) are sympathetic with the concerns
> that
>> Phillip Johnson makes about today's moral decay and its connection to
> a
>> philosophical naturalism. I am just not convinced that evolutionary
>> science (as practiced by someone like a Ken Miller) is really the
>> boogeyman Johnson makes it out to be.
>>
>> Blessings in Him,
>>
>> Clarke Morledge
>> College of William and Mary
>> Network Engineering
>> Williamsburg Virginia
>>
>> On Thu, 5 Jan 2006, Freeman, Louise Margaret wrote:
>>
>>> Ken Miller gave a talk at Case Western on Tuesday night about
> intelligent
>>> design; the video is
>>> available online at www.pandasthumb.org. It's long (amost 2 hours)
> but
>>> well worth the viewing.
>>> Our own George Murphy gave the opening prayer and moderated the Q & A
>
>>> session afterwards. I'd
>>> be interested in discussing the presentation on the list.
>>> __
>>> Louise M. Freeman, PhD
>>> Psychology Dept
>>> Mary Baldwin College
>>> Staunton, VA 24401
>>> 540-887-7326
>>> FAX 540-887-7121
>>
>
>
Received on Wed Jan 11 07:52:43 2006