[asa] self-introduction of new member

Hello! I'm a new member of the ASA list. I've been following the discussions here, on and off, for a while, and have found them quite interesting. I've learned from the individual comments of many different people, and (to single out only a few of many fine contributors) I've been particularly impressed by the Hebrew scholarship of George Murphy, the historical knowledge of Ted Davis, and the scientific understanding of Mike Gene. I decided that I would like to join in, both to learn more and to contribute something.

I'm a religion scholar with strong background in philosophy and a tad of math and science, and I've published two academic books in the area of religion and science. The books focus on the massive change in human thinking about nature that occurred over the course of the 17th century, and the connection of that change in thinking with new interpretations of the Bible and of Christian theology. The work I did on these books gave me a basis for further thought about the metaphysical foundations of natural science, and I've since tried to apply my understanding to grasp the essential elements of Darwinism, vitalism, teleology, theistic evolution, and intelligent design.

I come at these questions from a completely different angle than that of some on the ASA list. I have no personal baggage concerning YEC, OEC, Creation Science, etc. For one thing, I'm Canadian and these positions have no cultural traction here, partly because the religious situation is so different here (sectarianism, fundamentalism, and literalism are all minor features of the Canadian religious landscape), and partly because we have no complex First Amendment jurisprudence and no evolution-in-the-schools issue. The other thing is that my study of evolutionary theory proceeded from my interest in the history and philosophy of modern natural science, not out of any need to attack or defend any particular religious view or any particular reading of the Bible. With this kind of religious and intellectual background, things like gap theory, day-age theory, concordism, and so on, are entirely off my intellectual radar screen, and it requires a large cultural adjustment on my part to understand why some people think it's important to debate these things when there are, to my mind, much more foundational questions in the philosophy of nature to be dealt with. So if some of my comments sound off-beat to some on this list, I hope people can make the necessary allowances.

Thanks for having me here, and I hope my involvement will be constructive.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Wed Apr 15 02:35:22 2009