Re: [asa] Does the flagellum prove Genesis?

While to a certain extent I agree that everyone who is doing good
science is applying ID's concept of countering existing paradigms, the
reverse hardly seems self evident and in fact much evidence indicates
an actual negative correlation.

The suggestion that intelligence is a non natural concept is an
interesting one but one which seems to fail when we take into
consideration the evidence to the contrary. Rationality seems to be
under extreme selective pressures for instance while intelligence also
provides survival benefits. So the question is, can what we now see as
rationality and intelligence be reduced to natural concepts and can we
envision how such behaviors could have arisen via natural processes of
regularity and chance. So far I see no evidence that we cannot, and
much evidence that indeed we can, even though our knowledge in these
areas is quite limited.

On Dec 9, 2007 8:55 AM, Alexanian, Moorad <alexanian@uncw.edu> wrote:
> I do agree that ID did begin as countering materialism and so it certainly appeared as a negative since it was fighting Darwinism in the philosophical plane. I have always said that everyone that is doing good science is an ID proponent. Good science is the result of intelligence and rationality in the scientists themselves. Is not intelligence and rationality then somewhat encrusted in the structure of Nature? Paraphrasing John 3:6, "that which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit," that which is born of intelligence is intelligence.
>
>
>
> Moorad
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu on behalf of Randy Isaac
> Sent: Sat 12/8/2007 10:30 PM
> To: asa@calvin.edu
> Subject: Re: [asa] Does the flagellum prove Genesis?
>
>
> I have encouraged my ID friends, who keep saying that ID is not a negative approach but a positive indicator of design, to really pursue that direction. I have urged them to identify a specific example that is not negative or anti-evolution but is nevertheless a positive indication of an intelligent design in their opinion. I'm still waiting. Perhaps you could help provide one?
>
> Randy
>
> P.S. Hint: I do have a list of candidates in mind.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: John Walley <mailto:john_walley@yahoo.com>
> To: 'Dehler, Bernie' <mailto:bernie.dehler@intel.com>
> Cc: asa@calvin.edu
> Sent: Friday, December 07, 2007 4:18 PM
> Subject: RE: [asa] Does the flagellum prove Genesis?
>
>
> Thanks!!! This nails it for me. The problem with ID is that instead of being just pro-design, they went negative and anti-evolution.
>
>
>
> ...
>
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sun Dec 9 14:21:39 2007