I sometimes think that many commentators on faith and science don’t really understand the case being made for the inference of design from information. Here’s an attempt to explain it. Continue reading
I asked Steve Meyer what it felt like to be back in Cambridge again. He replied, “The weird thing is that it doesn’t feel more weird.” I think I know what he meant. Continue reading
I’ve reported back on what I consider the “big thing” at this weekend’s Tyndale Fellowship conference “Design in Nature?” Here’s just a miscellany of small points that gained my attention in the context of the bigger question of Christian responses to origins questions. Continue reading
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. Continue reading
Gregory raised the question of occasionalism in a reply to the last post, hinting at its presence in the BioLogos leadership and asking me about the alternatives to it in the pre-evolutionary era. Historical philosophy is a bit above my pay-grade, but it might be useful to discuss it in view of the ongoing question of divine agency in evolution. So here’s my overview for proper historians and philosophers to come back with corrections. Continue reading
In the article by Elliot Sober I mentioned in my previous post, he describes a hypothetical experiment to show what evolutionists mean by “random mutation”, before going on to establish that, because the Neodarwinian explanation is causally incomplete, science can neither deny, affirm, nor even express agnosticism on whether those random mutations were directed by an agent such as God. Continue reading
It’s lazy, I know, but this is a cut-and-paste of a post I wrote to Ted Davis on BioLogos. The Sober article makes points relevant to previous blogs here, so it seems relevant to record them and my comments on the Hump rather than to lose them in the Biologos archives. Continue reading
There’s a series on BioLogos at the moment, by Joshua Moritz, on the real meaning of the imago dei. Moritz is a significant scholar in the science and faith field, so one detects the influence of Ted Davis in his recruitment as an author. The basic thesis is that the “image” is, on textual and ANE grounds, best seen in relational, rather than ontological terms. Man is appointed as God’s representative on earth, with a priestly function in bringing all things together in God’s presence. He is elect but not primarily for his own sake (Moritz argues a parallel with election to salvation by grace, which, he says, is also primarily in order to benefit others).
A good many years ago I owned an interesting guitar built by a guy called John Bailey, who made guitars for Ralph Mc Tell, Gordon Giltrap, Roy Harper, Robert Plant and other folkies and rockers on the London scene in the 60s. He also mader the first flat-back bazouki for John Pearse and a mandolin for Robin Williamson of the Incredible String Band.
John died in 2011, some years after he retired to Dartmouth, and I had a chance to converse with him a year or two before. Interest in his work seems now to be picking up. So I’ve done a set of webpages documenting this particular guitar’s 44 year career. You may find it interesting, perhaps, though it has zilch to do with science or faith! As Gordon Giltrap said recently, we’re only custodians of these instruments, and it’s out duty to endow them with some history. Next up, the alto sax my Dad bought in 1936 which I’m gigging with on Sunday!
For your edification, let’s attempt a synthesis of economics, free will and Intelligent Design. Maybe it will kick off a whole new academic discipline. Or maybe not.
