Jon
As best I can tell Gregory wants a category intermediate between natural
and supernatural, let me call it natural++ ie natural incremented.
Greg probably has a better name but I don't know what it is. It is
unclear to me if he includes all of life in natural++ or just humanity,
but I assume just humanity. As best I can tell this is because he wants
to differentiate natural++ (humanity) from natural, human intelligence
from the mind of animals, value of human life from value of animal life
or inanimate objects... (Some days I wonder about human intelligence,
especially my own.)
Certainly the use of natural that Gregory seems to want is used in other
discourse. If one is walking in the country side and observes a certain
configuration of objects, one may well say that this configuration is
not natural, meaning that it was created by human hand.
I'm not sure if Gregory's rejection of MN is because of his split of
nature and nature++ or if it is because of other possible baggage
associated with ontological naturalism. For example Karl Popper equated
naturalism with inductive theory of science. He rejected it based on his
general critique of induction. (The Logic of Scientific Discovery) I
seem to remember that Gregory is rather dismissive of Popper where as I
find him quite attractive.
Dave W (ASA member)
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sat Apr 25 11:16:00 2009
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat Apr 25 2009 - 11:16:00 EDT