Hello All,
I was a little hesitant about bringing this Creationism stuff up because it
can be rather like igniting a powder keg?
I like Pirsig's point that biological evolution is moving away from Inorganic
laws.
This apparent lack of teleology is disconcerting for those of a religious
bent, and i can see how this would be unsettling from classic moralist point
of view?
However, the rejection of evolution outright does not appear to correlate
with the evidence as we have interpreted it?
Pirsig's resolution of this divide by postulating a moral reality through and
through coupled with his metaphysical split between Dynamic and static
quality ties things up neatly?
Science and ethics have come much closer together, and both are included in a
mystic framework.
Evolution is a theory indeed.
The evidence for it is impressive?
The MOQ account of evolution is most elegant and all the more impressive for
it?
To insist that a literal biblical account should be given equal weight would
be like insisting virgin birth should be allowable upon birth certificates.
All the best,
Squonk.
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:24 BST