[js1138]

love, desire, the seemingly in-built sense of justice, the moral sense, et al. These can produce tangible effects, but usually not of the kind studied by the physical sciences.

Sure they can. It's being done all the time. do you not read?

[betty boop]

me: love, desire, the seemingly in-built sense of justice, the moral sense, et al. These can produce tangible effects, but usually not of the kind studied by the physical sciences.

you: Sure they can. It's being done all the time. do you not read?

I do read. Quite a bit in fact.

If scientists are doing such things "all the time," they are probably biologists poaching on philosophical turf without a suitable method.... If they are doing such things, then that might have something to do with trying to flesh out their original, unshakeable presupposition that Darwinian macroevolution theory is valid, and thereby it must have a way to explain all these other "intangibles" lest it be found wanting.

Thus the original presupposition determines the conclusion in such a way that nonconforming evidence will be excluded from the get-go. But this is not something I would describe as a free and "open" inquiry.... It is biased, "closed" by the requirements of the original presupposition itself.

But the fact is, the theory has no explanation for man. And trying to smuggle human "spiritual concerns" (mainly of a social nature) via an unsuitable method and bastardized philosophy probably will not fix this problem. Darwinian materialists (and they are legion) absolutely deny soul, spirit, anyway.... For such folks, this is the beauty of Darwinian theory in the first place, that it denies the existence of such entities! So what's the point?

I honestly believe that at least some of these people simply refuse to allow any possible falsification of macroevolutionary theory: They have invested so much, and have so much at stake, in its being "true." This is how science is converted into doctrine, resting on faith and not on evidence.

Well, my two cents worth, FWIW.