From: Mark Steven Heyman (MarkHeyman@infoproconsulting.com)
Date: Wed Apr 27 2005 - 05:09:05 BST
Hi Ham,
Just two comments, since you're exhausted... :-)
On 26 Apr 2005 at 4:04, hampday@earthlink.net wrote:
Mark, it's obvious to me that you enjoy the role of devil's advocate, and
are not about to make any concessions on the ID issue.
msh says:
I've never played the devil's advocate on this list. I'm way to busy
to engage in freshman debating tactics. I honestly believe that the
design argument is invalid in the classical version, and
scientifically and philosophically invalid in the modern incarnation.
But I do not at all negate the possibility of a valid version being
presented. I just haven't seen one, yet.
<snip>
ham:
Thanks for the references, Mark. But, you see, I'm really not interested in
ID criticisms because they won't change my mind, no matter how clever or
rational they may seem.
msh says:
This sort of says it all, so I'm satisfied. Wouldn't it be wise, and
more honest, to stop using ID to support your belief in a Creator of
the universe? And to stop insisting that your belief system is
rational, rather than religious?
Best,
Mark Steven Heyman (msh)
--
InfoPro Consulting - The Professional Information Processors
Custom Software Solutions for Windows, PDAs, and the Web Since 1983
Web Site: http://www.infoproconsulting.com
"Force is the vital principle and immediate parent of despotism."
Thomas Jefferson
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
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 2.1.5 : Wed Apr 27 2005 - 05:17:55 BST