In a message dated 7/25/02 10:16:23 AM GMT Daylight Time,
Elizaphanian@members.v21.co.uk writes:
> The first is one about the rejection of 'meaninglessness' in the universe,
> which, especially in Richard Dawkins, seems to be tied up with the defence
> of evolutionary theory. I think it is perfectly possible to accept the main
> elements of evolutionary theory - especially the question of the overall
> timeframe involved, which I think is the single most important issue -
> while
> rejecting the idea that the universe is therefore a meaningless place.
> Indeed, that is one of the attractive things about the MoQ. (I would ground
> the meaningfulness in a more explicitly religious framework, but again, I
> do
> not see incompatibility here). This seems to be what lies behind the
> language of 'intelligent design'. I would be interested to read a little
> more about that.
>
Hi Sam,
I find it interesting to note that Dawkins is a committed NeoDawinist but he
totally rejects Darwinism in human behaviour. The simple observation that
human social behaviour can manipulate evolution for its own ends and
therefore circumvent greed, insecurity, aggression, etc. supports the MOQ.
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 - 16:02:28 BST