Re: [asa] What Neo-Creationists Get Right

Just to be clear -- I didn't write it, I posted it from thescientist.com

Another Polanyi-ite! Hurrah!

On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 2:25 PM, j burg <hossradbourne@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 6/20/08, David Opderbeck <dopderbeck@gmail.com> wrote (in part):
>
> "The third noteworthy point IDers make has its roots, paradoxically, in a
> kind of psychological empiricism. Millions of people believe they directly
> experience the reality of a Creator every day, and to them it seems like
> nonsense to insist that He does not exist. Unless they are lying, God's
> existence is to them an observable fact"
>
> Perhaps a bit overstated, although the point you make is true. Although my
> own epiphanies (experiencing God's reality) are few -- they are, none the
> less, convincing to me. Do I call them "an observabable fact?" I think that
> I would argue "yes," although they fall into a category midway between the
> subjective and objective -- that is, Polyani's "personal."
>
> The fact that I claim this does not make me, however, very sympathetic to
> the current ID movement. While I wish them well, I fear they are on wild
> goose chases and will wind up doing a disservice to the Christ they honor.
>
> Burgy
>

-- 
David W. Opderbeck
Associate Professor of Law
Seton Hall University Law School
Gibbons Institute of Law, Science & Technology
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.