Ed Brayton writes:
Actually, this depends on which ID advocate you're talking to at the
time and that fact points up the lack of a coherent ID model.
This is fair enough, in a sense. Yes, to be sure, there are
different versions of ID, just as there are different versions of
most schools of thought. But the fact that a theory has different
versions that do not cohere with each other does not mean that the
theory, as a general approach, is not coherent.
It's also worth adding that, outside the range of what is
usually labeled as ID theory, are a whole set of other views, which
are self-consciously religious/theological or meta-empirical rather
than faux scientific, that posit that an intelligent God in some
sense guides or stands behind or sustains or pushes or pulls or is
otherwise involved in the process that science, within its own
perfectly appropriate naturalistic methodological limitations,
describes to us as evolution through random mutation and natural selection.
Perry
*******************************************************
Perry Dane
Professor of Law
Rutgers University
School of Law -- Camden
217 North Fifth Street
Camden, NJ 08102
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.camlaw.rutgers.edu/bio/925/
Work: (856) 225-6004
Fax: (856) 969-7924
Home: (610) 896-5702
*******************************************************
_______________________________________________
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.
Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can
read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the
messages to others.
