bttt
Gagdad Bob (Robert Godwin) said...
Darwinians can’t help anthropomorphizing the theory, being that the dullest of them are still anthropomorphs.
8/18/2010
Gagdad Bob said...
“........For the materialist to place an arbitrary limit with regard to what the human being may know and experience is purely arbitrary and incoherent, for what is the principle that says we may only know this truth but not that truth, or this reality but not that?”
8/18/2010
In the comment section here:
Creation Myths of the Tenured http://onecosmos.blogspot.com/2010/08/creation-myths-of-tenured.html
Thank you ever so much for the link to Gagdad Bob's classic piece, "Creation Myths of the Tenured." I'd read it before; but not down-thread, to reader comments. And there are some real beauties there, the above italics being a sample.
Plus your citation of Gagdad Bob, down-thread: "Darwinians can’t help anthropomorphizing the theory, being that the dullest of them are still anthropomorphs."
I surmise they will ever continue to function at the level of "anthropomorphs" (i.e., not yet fully human) as long as they continue to willfully avoid any recognition of the following:
...the suddenness (especially in Darwinian terms) of man's psychospiritual transformation also surpasses anything natural selection can explain. It can try, but to say that a random genetic mutation accounts for the human capacity to know truth and beauty makes no sense whatsoever.What could possibly be more "anthropomorphic" than the following "attitude":
Anyway, at least Ridley is honest in acknowledging the problem, although he doesn't exactly name it or draw out its full implications. But the problem is this: that there is a literally infinite gap between man and animal (even though there is an obvious continuity as well), just as there is an infinite gap between nothing and existence or matter and life.
What's funny is that in their haste to discredit the weak anthropic principle, the militant secularists have retreated into cosmology of repeated spawning of universes, each with arbitrary values for physical constants, thus "guaranteeing" after enough trials that there will be at least one which is capable of supporting life; left indeterminate is if there ever will be a rigorous way of interacting with the other multiverses.ANY ESCAPE HATCH will do. But still they are in the position of "criticizing others" (i.e., for holding any "anthropic principle") for doing the very thing they themselves are doing....
Whatever. I still hold with what I said: Without the human mind, there is no science. All the knowledge we have of the Universe comes to us via human minds. To me, this is the bottom-line of the anthropic or anthropomorphic principle, right there. How can we rationally disparage it?