Re: [asa] Education, Medicine, and Evolution

On Sun, Jun 1, 2008 at 6:20 PM, Collin Brendemuehl
<collinb@brendemuehl.net> wrote:
>
> PvM,
>
>> One has to be careful how one applies these terms. In speciation,
>> directionality refers to sexual preferences, in that sense there is
>> 'directionality'. Additionally, constraints can provide
>> 'directionality' to evolution but that should not be confused with
>> "evolution has no direction". Constraints are a major reason why
>> evolution appears to be teleological.
> Given that mathematical inevitability is sometimes attached, then at times,
> for certain theorists, perhaps evolution is teleological.
>
> (Even if, in the worst case, all of ID and special creation is finally
> proven false, one of the best things we can do is to force naturalism to
> clean up its horrible grasp of reality. The extreme

How could ID or special creation be proven false as it lies outside
the realm of science? I do not see naturalism as having a horrible
grasp of reality, certainly as Christians we can believe in God, but
that does not give us a privileged position over those who hold to
naturalism.

> philosophical difficulties which some tolerate are often quite humorous.)

Such philisophical difficulties however are not unique to naturalism
and include Christianity as well.

> We have the same problem in theology. Some of the
> persuasion known as "Arminian" make the mistake of becoming quite Pelagian.
> And some Calvinists end up as Determinists. Not all theorists/theologians
> are consistent or "orthodox".

> WRT Brayton's material, I will grant the clarification regarding
> percentages, but not the proposed witch hunt.

The 'with hunt' is merely a call to identify those who are violating
their duties as educators as well as the constitution of this country
and give them a choice. Why should we allow creationism to be taught
as if it were science? I for one fully support the effort to keep
creationism out of the classrooms and if, as the data show, quite a
few teachers violate the trust relationship by teaching creationism,
then something needs to happen.

On Sun, Jun 1, 2008 at 6:39 PM, Collin Brendemuehl
<collinb@brendemuehl.net> wrote:
> Murray,
>

> What's your opinion on evolutionary development of all of human agencys wrt
> the scope of the claim.
> More specifically ...
> If all of the positives are attributable to evolutionary development, are
> not also the evils?

It's hard to speak of good and evil and claim that evolutionary
development only involves positives. This is illogical as evolutionary
development has nothing to say about positive or negative, which
relies more on a moral judgement on our parts. So yes, depending on
one's views on morality, positives and evils can be part of
'evolutionary development'. Of course, evolutionary theory and
evolution do not really 'care' about good or evil as it is an
unrelated topic. Good and evil are best left to realm of morality and
in the case of Christianity to God and our faith. As such, good and
evil do become problematic issues but that's what happens in
philosophical positions.

> --Any idea why there would be a tendency to avoid claiming the evil things
> that have evolved?

I see no tendency. In fact, one wonders why ID insists that the
flagellum which likely relates to the Type III secretory system, is
designed when it causes so much evil. That I find a much more
problematic position. As a scientist, we can interpret things as
'good' or 'evil' but nature has no judgment.

> Have you observed, among evolutionists, a regular appeal to a Kantian source
> for morality?

Evolutionists I assume have a large variety of resources they can
appeal to for morality. From Christian morality, to evolved morality
these concepts all tend to be found amongst evolutionists. In fact,
since evolution is such a well supported fact and theory, I find your
question somewhat puzzling.

No, evolution is not going to help us decide what is 'good' and what
is 'evil' although evolution can help us explain how altruism and
reciprocal altruism evolved and played a role in establishing
morality, where morality is in most cases a very subjective and local
set of rules based on nature and nurture.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Mon Jun 2 01:23:25 2008