Quack
Posts: 1961
Joined: May 2007
|
At
http://www.uncommondescent.com/expelle....-288441
I found this quote of Behe:
| Quote | “There’s no reason that the extended fine-tuning I am presenting here necessarily requires active meddling with nature any more than the fine-tuning of theistic evolution does. One can think the universe is finely tuned toany degree and still conceive that “the universe [originated] by a single creative act” and underwent “it’s natural development by laws implanted in it.” One simply has to envision that the agent who caused the universe was able to specify from the start not only laws but much more.
231, Edge Of Evolution” |
The implication being, as far as I can tell, that these ‘laws’ were laid down by the designer at the creation of the universe and are the ultimate cause for both the biological evolution down to the butterfly wing eye spots and everything else. It seems to me Behe is lost in reductionism, completely unaware of where science is going. Seems he has progressed from the interventionist mode of ID to the front loaded, non-interventionist mode. What he shares with all sorts of creationists however, is the faith in reductionism.
It is interesting to note that O’Leary and others are bent on keeping the interventionist designer alive, making it clear that he/it is not identical with ET, leaving G-o-d as the only option. All that remains is for them to convince Dembski that ID should be replaced with DD, Divine Design.
Now it so happens that I am re-reading “A Different Universe” by Robert B. Laughlin for the umpteenth time, searching for a suitable quote for use a sig. But I am giving it up; the whole book is the entire argument, a simplified resume of which might be this quote “We also know that while a simple and absolute law, such as hydrodynamics, can evolve from the deeper laws underneath, it is at the same time independent of them, in that it would be the same even if the deeper laws were changed” (From the chapter “The Emergent Age”, p.207)
In the same chapter, Laughlin says things like
“The idea that the struggle to understand the natural world has come to an end is not only wrong, it is ludicrously wrong. We are surrounded by mysterious physical miracles, and the continuing, unfinished task of science is to unravel them.”
“Ironically, the very success of reductionism has helped pave the way for its eclipse.”
“The transition to the age of Emergence brings to an end the myth of the absolute power of mathematics. This myth is still entrenched in our culture, unfortunately, …”
There is so much more but I’ve got to stop somewhere. I think this is a very important book, (I don’t think Laughlin would have written it were it not) and I will have to spend much more time with it before I am through with it. I just love it because it forces me to think.
ID/creationism relies heavily on reductionism in its crusade against science. While Laughlin claims that we are “surrounded by mysterious physical miracles”, and they are not the works of some Intelligent Designer…
I hope a lot of people will buy this book, read it, study it, understand it!
--------------
Rocks have no biology.
Robert Byers.
|
