Yes, that makes sense. Failing the filter doesn't mean there is no design. But the question is whether design can be detected without passing the explanatory filter.
Randy
David Opderbeck wrote:
So, as Dembski puts it, designed things will sometimes "slip past the net," but "[e]ven though the Explanatory Filter is not a reliable criterion for eliminating design, it is, I argue, a reliable criterion for detecting design."
Dembski's design filter, then, is based on gaps -- it is a "net" that catches things not explained by what he calls "law" or "chance."
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Tue Nov 4 11:26:48 2008
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Nov 04 2008 - 11:26:48 EST