Replies

Intelligent design is the idea that life is too complex for random evolution and must have a creator.

Of course you know, dear Patrick, that that's not what ID is at all. It says nothing about whether the source of the "intelligence" is a natural process or an agent.

I think what this brou-ha-ha is ultimately about is methodological naturalism is a scientific method based on only two of Aristotle's four causes: the material and the efficient. It is a "reductionist" method, in that it omits to consider the formal and final causes. ID is interested in all four causes.

Ultimately, this fight is not over a "creator." It's about what causes the scientific method ought to address, going forward. FWIW

Exactly.. ID is Agnostic Scientific Materialist Creationism..

An Oxy-Oxy-Oxy Moron if I ever saw one.. and since I never have, it might be the only Oxy-Oxy-Oxy Moron I ever noticed..

The Triune DuuH.. recognizing the/a creator but making him impotent(clipped).. like some do ID'ers do with their Poodles.. or Cats.. Fluffy, well groomed, but impotent.. Just the thing for an upper middle class 2nd reality..

But it is an alternate 2nd reality for normal scientific materialists, like "Evos"... maybe thats why they "protest too much".. My thought is they should care less.. They don't, they fight against ID as IF is was a vaid alternative to their own 2nd reality..

Good fight eh!..

I think what this brou-ha-ha is ultimately about is methodological naturalism is a scientific method based on only two of Aristotle's four causes: the material and the efficient. It is a "reductionist" method, in that it omits to consider the formal and final causes. ID is interested in all four causes.

Ultimately, this fight is not over a "creator." It's about what causes the scientific method ought to address, going forward. FWIW

Excellent point. I fully agree! Thank you for your post!

"Of course you know, dear Patrick, that that's not what ID is at all. It says nothing about whether the source of the "intelligence" is a natural process or an agent.

Let's take a look at that. If we include natural processes in the definition of intelligence, we broaden the definition of intelligence beyond the useful. With that definition, *any* selection, one of the main mechanisms behind evolution, becomes intelligent. It also removes any purpose to pursue ID.

"I think what this brou-ha-ha is ultimately about is methodological naturalism is a scientific method based on only two of Aristotle's four causes: the material and the efficient. It is a "reductionist" method, in that it omits to consider the formal and final causes. ID is interested in all four causes.

Why should science be concerned with anyone's dislike of 'reductionist' methods? Exactly what advantage would there be in adopting all of Aristotle's causes? What purpose is served by including those causes?

"Ultimately, this fight is not over a "creator." It's about what causes the scientific method ought to address, going forward. FWIW

Yet the result of including those causes is to open science up to the supernatural. How does this jibe with the claim that ID is not interested in the supernatural?