Re: [asa] TE/EC Response - ideology according to Terry

Dear Cameron:

Thanks as always for your thoughtful and interesting reply.

I understand your point about repetition, and I appreciate the challenge
that historical sciences have because their subject matters are
non-repeatable. Your comments helped me understand why you ask for the
"500-page books" from evolution but not from other biological sciences
such as developmental biology.

I also appreciate your carefully phrased criticisms of evolutionary
biologists, in that you don't blame them for the difficulties presented
by their subject matter. Rather, you simply want them to be more honest
about those difficulties and not mislead people into thinking that
evolutionary explanations are already complete, etc.

I'm glad you mentioned the Davis-Murphy-Russell model. That is
precisely the kind of intelligent design that, so far, seems most
consistent with known data. The bridge between Davis-Murphy-Russell TE
and Behe-Wybrow-Meyer ID is not so long, and maybe not so hard to build!

You picked up nicely on the analogical parallels I tried to make. For
example, you wrote:

"The actual operation of embryonic processes may be nothing more than
blind matter being re-arranged according to a set of mechanical chemical
instructions, but the fact that the processes exist at all is due to
intelligent design. Similarly, if macroevolution is a totally
naturalistic process, then all species can be produced according to a
set of genetic modifications that requires no will, consciousness or
direction on the part of any intelligent being, but the fact that
genomes are set up for this activity is due to the intelligent design of
the entire process."

I think that is similar to the position of many TEs, such as Francis
Collins, who see the evolutionary process itself as being not
necessarily guided (i.e., Davis-Murphy-Russell-type directional
mutations might not be happening) and yet there is still design because
fine-tuning of the universe itself was required for undirected
biological evolution to even take place.

"Alternately, if macroevolution is not a totally naturalistic process,
then intelligence is input directly, as the process rolls along."

Indeed, that view (i.e., direct intelligent input as the process rolls
along) is the position that I see most ID proponents insisting upon.
Sometimes you seem to insist upon it as well, but other times you merely
seem to be defending its right to stand as a respectable alternative. I
can assent to the latter, especially when articulated in the
Davis-Murphy-Russell language. I don't see how it can be tested
scientifically, and I suppose that will always be a distinction between
TE and ID, but such a difference should not bring enmity between ID and
TE proponents.

Regarding the psalm, Cameron, I was referring to an historical shift in
views about embryology. Compared to impersonal and mechanistic modern
embryology, earlier embryological theories such as preformationism and
vitalism were, at one time, considered more compatible with the faith of
the psalmist. I was not accusing you of holding to a preformationist or
vitalist view or anything other than a thoroughly modern embryology! My
goal was simply to seek the reasons for the differences between your
views on embryology and your views on evolution. Regardless of their
views on evolution, I do not attack any Christian for appealing to that
psalm. In fact, I quote a similar psalm that expresses a similar faith
on the homepage of the Nebraska Religious Coalition for Science
Education.

Thanks again.

Chuck

Charles (Chuck) F. Austerberry, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor of Biology
Hixson-Lied Room 438
Creighton University
2500 California Plaza
Omaha, NE 68178
Phone: 402-280-2154
Fax: 402-280-5595
e-mail: cfauster@creighton.edu
http://groups.creighton.edu/premedsociety/
 
Nebraska Religious Coalition for Science Education
http://nrcse.creighton.edu
 

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Wed Jul 22 10:53:05 2009