Brad writes me:
quote:
BUT THE POINT ABOUT EVC IS NOT about whether I’m a genius, a working scientist, not a naive graduated student
I guess not, but I can't help speculating from time to time about you being a genius. Your knowledge of scientists and philosophers - not to mention science and philosophy - goes far beyond mine. I can follow some of what you say about Kant because I became interested in him at college and read parts of his
Critique of Pure Reason. (BTW, for anyone who might not know, Kant is often considered to be one of the most important German philosophers of all time. If you aren't familiar with him, check the entry at
Wikipedia. His writing, if I recall, was often cryptic in ways similar to Brad's writing). I've read up on him lately to refresh my memory, and I notice that his views seem to heavily influence yours. Am I correct in believing that you see 'intelligent design' as a type of
a priori knowledge?
I think it's important not to try to carry Kant's science notions too far in today's debate, because his ideas were formulated at a time when modern science was in its infancy.
quote:
I don’t see how my cultural actions warrant the response I received from professionals and in post after post you have noticed this. Thanks
You're welcome.
quote:
I empathize with creationists of any religion because of this hostility or persecution that I witnessed and now and again only blip on the screen every now and then .
I can understand your empathy for creationists, but I think this points out a cultural difference between us. Where you live, creationists are a minority, no? That's not at all the case in Mississippi. Creationists here are an almost overwhelming majority. So while I can understand your empathy and even your philosophic agreement with them on some of the ideas behind ID, I cannot understand why you feel that ID is science.
quote:
A jar with a dead frog in it was enough for my lover so a well intentioned post should work just as well as happiness lost.
You do crack me up sometimes, Brad. That's marvelous!
quote:
I was always wondering if one day I might be at the cultural equivalent of Einstein’s patent office. It seems at least THAT time has arrived.
Another interesting choice of words. I think I see your point.
quote:
The crucial thing here is to facilitate prediction from a family of proteins to other molecular correlations. Should such exist, there is no stopping actual research on the relation of subatomic forces and heritability. My approach if it works will out compete the current methods. That said it is true we need to see working examples but I posted this because I see no a priori reason to discount categorically thoughts that might relate ordered atomic states and heritability. It seems pretty easy to contemplate that existence.
Easy to contemplate maybe, but are you talking about using "thoughts" to justify ID as science? I don't think you can do that until you find those working examples you spoke of.
Keep America Safe
AND Free!