Re: [asa] Short reply to Timaeus, on ID and TE

Hi Gregory,

"There are certainly 'ID folks' there at TT's, as Mike refers to them, but they are an e-chat/blog variety and not publishing anything professionally."

That's not an important distinction.

"Perhap this is one reason that Mike Gene, co-founder of Telic Thoughts, is no longer officially there (please excuse, I haven't read about it yet and perhaps Mike would rather speak about it in private)"

There is no mystery here:

http://telicthoughts.com/farewell/

"- and now he's focussing more on his new blog, in connection with his book?"

Indeed.

" At that time (more than a year ago), on Telic Thoughts Mike said to me that 'intelligent design' is not about philosophy or religion."

Correct. And this is the truth. Of course, ID means different things to different people.

"Yet, I kept asking about the relevance of theology and philosophy for his perspective of i+d."

The main relevance is it allows me to approach this topic in an open-ended manner that tries hard to be intellectually honest. It seems that for most people, "i+d" is a means to an end. For me, it's an expression of genuine curiosity.

"The qualifier 'theistic' is certainly about religion."

Indeed.

"It seems thus to me that Mike's views, during the course of 5+ years on-line debating intelligent design, evoution and creation, have 'changed-over-time'. But of course, this doesn't mean his views have 'evolved,' according to human-social terms and grammar meaning.

Changing over time is called learning. Yes, I am a life-long learner.

-Mike

  ----- Original Message -----
  From: Gregory Arago
  To: Nucacids ; Don Nield
  Cc: Ted Davis ; asa@lists.calvin.edu
  Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2008 5:34 AM
  Subject: Re: [asa] Short reply to Timaeus, on ID and TE

        Hi Don,

        I can answer to this as I was active on the Telic Thoughts blog for several months (perhaps even longer, Mike?) and discussed many things with Mike Gene and others, some of whom, e.g. Joy, Krauze, Deuce, bipod, guts, macht, Though Provoker, Bilbo, Rock, are still there.

        No, 'the ID folks' at Telic Thoughts are a rather eclectic group (e.g. http://theology3m.blogsome.com/), certainly not in the mainstream of the IDM or its views. Dembski has acknowledged and endorsed Mike Gene's existence in the 'intelligent design' controversy, but as far as I know his views of ID differ in significant ways from Mike's, which is presumably shown in The Design Matrix. Mike seems to be much friendlier to TE and EC than does Dembski and many others in the IDM proper, though it would seem that the younger generation of ID promoters is not as polarising on TE or EC vs. ID.

        There are certainly 'ID folks' there at TT's, as Mike refers to them, but they are an e-chat/blog variety and not publishing anything professionally.

        Perhap this is one reason that Mike Gene, co-founder of Telic Thoughts, is no longer officially there (please excuse, I haven't read about it yet and perhaps Mike would rather speak about it in private) - and now he's focussing more on his new blog, in connection with his book? At that time (more than a year ago), on Telic Thoughts Mike said to me that 'intelligent design' is not about philosophy or religion. Yet, I kept asking about the relevance of theology and philosophy for his perspective of i+d. The qualifier 'theistic' is certainly about religion. It seems thus to me that Mike's views, during the course of 5+ years on-line debating intelligent design, evoution and creation, have 'changed-over-time.' But of course, this doesn't mean his views have 'evolved,' according to human-social terms and grammar meaning.

        I am glad to see Mike Gene now participating at ASA and hope that his views and his 'science' can be given a fair hearing at this location, by ASA listmembers. He is a unique figure on this topic (and loves rabbits!). Mike knows that as a sociologist of science, I'll be watching his participation with interest.

        Gregory

        --- On Tue, 11/4/08, Don Nield <d.nield@auckland.ac.nz> wrote:

          From: Don Nield <d.nield@auckland.ac.nz>
          Subject: Re: [asa] Short reply to Timaeus, on ID and TE
          To: "Nucacids" <nucacids@wowway.com>
          Cc: "Ted Davis" <TDavis@messiah.edu>, asa@lists.calvin.edu
          Received: Tuesday, November 4, 2008, 8:06 AM

Mike has just made a very interesting statement. I would like to ask him if
"the ID folks" include Dembski, who in the past has made statements
that TE's are no friends of ID's.
Don

Nucacids wrote:
> Hi Ted,
>
>> I've very often said the same thing about Behe, here and at least
a couple
>> of times on UcD. But I think in the latter case, I was not met with
much
>> approval. Behe there is an ID and NOT a TE, for most people; it's
all
>> politics. Which is probably why id (as above, my view) is not ID.
>> Politics. But real politics that we seem unable to get past, from
either
>> side.
>
> Good point. I made the case that Behe was a TE back on Telic Thoughts
over a year ago:
> http://telicthoughts.com/behe-and-theistic-evolution/
>
> Different context, different result - the ID folks had no problem with
accepting Behe as a TE; the critics did.
>
> -Mike

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Now with a new friend-happy design! Try the new Yahoo! Canada Messenger

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  No virus found in this incoming message.
  Checked by AVG.
  Version: 7.5.549 / Virus Database: 270.8.6/1765 - Release Date: 11/3/2008 4:59 PM

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 18:51:55 2008