[Phys-L] Re: [SPAM-4.611] Re: [SPAM-4.611] Re: THE WEDGE STRATEGY of The ID Movement
From: Robert.Cohen at PO-BOX.ESU.EDU (Robert Cohen)
Date: Wed Oct 19 20:05:11 2005
I am going to attempt to put in my two cents.
People use different definitions of science. To some*, biology just
means "study of life", where "study" means "any kind of study", whether
it is testable or not. For those people, restricting biology to only
"natural" explanations implies that only "natural" explanations are
possible. These people feel threatened by such an attitude and start
demanding "equal time."
You may argue that biology is not so broad as this but they will think
you are arbitrarily limiting it. After all, to the highly religious,
they know** that faith has value. So, telling them it has none is
threatening. Again, keep in mind that they are using a definition of
science that is different than yours.
Perhaps if we made a bigger effort to explain WHY we limit science to
testable explanations and that this does not necessarily mean that
testable explanations are the ONLY explanations that are possible, we
can get over this hump.
Is this too much to ask?
*This not the definition I'm guessing the subscribers of this list would
use. I'm assuming that people on this list would define biology as a
"natural science", not simply as "the study of life".
**I use the word "know" because *they* feel they know it, not because we
all can agree on its value. Personally, I think it has great value -
when you are faced with something that doesn't make any sense, it is
very comforting to have faith that everything will work out in the end.
____________________________________________________
Robert Cohen, Chair, Department of Physics
East Stroudsburg University; E. Stroudsburg, PA 18301
570-422-3428; www.esu.edu/~bbq