Search
-
Recent Posts
- Confusion over temples produces confusion over worship 13/01/2025
- RIP Günter Bechly 09/01/2025
- What the Bible should have said #28 04/01/2025
- Religion without a covenant 02/01/2025
- Ox and ass before him bow… 26/12/2024
Recent Comments
- Jon Garvey on Confusion over temples produces confusion over worship
- Ben on Confusion over temples produces confusion over worship
- Jon Garvey on Confusion over temples produces confusion over worship
- Peter Hickman on Confusion over temples produces confusion over worship
- Robert Byers on RIP Günter Bechly
Post Archive
Daily Archives: 15/07/2012
Why Steve Fuller is on the money
Over at Uncommon Descent there has been a thread running for over a fortnight majoring on sociologist Steve Fuller’s suggestion that ID ought to be upfront regarding its Abrahamic theistic assumptions, rather than sticking to a purely “naturalistic” scientific position that it cannot comment on the nature of the designer, though the attribution of design may have metaphysical implications. Gregory (also a regular supporter here), whose acquaintance with Fuller prompted the thread, has been getting a hard time (though, as always, giving one too) over Fuller’s presumption in trying to change ID’s terms of reference from those of its leading proponents.
Posted in Creation, Science, Theology
30 Comments