[Platt] In the deterministic world of science, chance is a measure of ignorance. When a scientist doesn't know what causes a certain effect, like mind emerging from mud, the effect is attributed to chance...
[Arlo] How does "chance" differ from "Dynamic Quality"? It sounds to me, every time you say this, that you posit "intent" to Dynamic Quality. True? If not, what are the distinctions? Because I tell ya, aside from your allusions to DQ being an "intentional force"(Qualigod), I don't see any distinction. And if DQ "makes" things happen, what does that say about human agency? Or does DQ only deliberately order the inorganic-biological levels? [Krimel] I agree completely here. It seems to me that Platt and dmb are attempting to read choice and intention into even the inorganic level. I don't see how this differs from theology in the least. Platt sneers a chance but at least acknowledges some kind of vague theological convictions. Dave, just pretends that whatever it is he is saying, it is not theology. It looks like a duck. It quacks like a duck but it's a bulldog. Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
