Hi Krimel, I agree with what you said. My view is that thermodynamics is a model used to explain (part of) the universe. Why would somebody use this to support a metaphysical argument, when it is much easier to state that this model is incomplete in its description of the universe?
Because the laws of thermodynamics seem to be violated, the farthest one needs to look is at the model itself, and not claim that this needs a metaphysical interpretation. Sorry to butt in. Mark On Jan 21, 2010, at 9:34:45 PM, Krimel <[email protected]> wrote: [Krimel] My question was prompted by a quote you posted earlier that included this: "A century and a half after the publication of Origin of Species, evolutionary thinking has expanded beyond the field of biology to include virtually all human-related subjectsanthropology, archeology, psychology, economics, religion, morality, politics, culture, and art. And yet you claim all those disciplines would be better off embracing teleology and an account the thermodynamics that Pirsig shares with the Institute for Creation Research. 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/
