because then one might not be able to distinguish a demonology from the study of the production of beings.
I am tempted to goto Bryant College and see if the baraminologists might not be interested in following up on Mike's suggestion as to a possible reciprocity bewteen occasionalistic propositions and a given pre-established harmony as it makes clear how to re-read the following two paragraphs of Kant's without the all the culture of a difference between ID and Biblical Creationism ( I purposely type them out of sequence so that you might be able to see the difference).
Kant Critique of Teleological Judgement &86 (in the publisher Halfner Pub Company's page 294)
quote:
Since now it is only as a moral being that we recognize man as the purpose of creation, we have in the first palce a ground (at least the chief condition) for regarding the world as a whole connected according to purposes and as a system of final causes. And, more especially, as regards the reference (necessary for us by the constitution of our reason) of natural purposes to an intelligent world cause, we have one principle enabling us to think the nature and properties of this first cause as supreme ground in the kingdom of purposes, and to determine its concept. This physical teleology could not do; it could only lead to indeterminate concepts of it, unserviceable alike in theoretical and in pratical use.
quote:
If now we meet with purposive arrangements in the world and, as reason inevitable requires, subordinate the purposes that are only conditioned to an unconditioned, supreme, i.e. final, purpose, then we easily see in the first place that we are thus concerned, not with a puroose of nature (internal to itself), so far as it exists, but with a purpose of its existence along with all its ordinances and, consequently, with the ultimate purpose of creation , and specially with the supreme condition under which a final purpose(i.e. the determining ground of a supreme understanding for the production of beings of the world) can be allowed.
I lay awake at night wondering if this is where Mayr derived the difference of "ultimate and proximate" biology from, rather than training the student Gould to extend natural history into a new title called by Kant the
archeology of nature. This seems to be the only way to resolve the human population problem by noneconomic force and the use of food chains and baramins might be a human means to this hopefully not final end of human life on this planent Earth.