In the response to Haarsma's article "Is ID Scientific" Behe complains
that only the negative side of ID is dealt with and none of the positive
arguments for ID are dealt with. Having read Johnston and Behe plus a
few of Dembski's papers, I fail to see many positive arguments for ID.
Am I missing something that I should read? Or is Behe talking about
what we discussed on this list a while back and sometimes referred to as
lower case id? As I recall 'id' referred to the fine tuning argument,
God's nurturing of his creation and his sovereignty over what seem to us
as chance events and many/some indicated they could agree with id
defined that way.
Dave W
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sun Mar 25 15:24:12 2007
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Mar 25 2007 - 15:24:14 EDT