Phillip Clayton explains:
All I can say is that the person who believes this is a valid argument has never taken a biology class & paid close attention.
Maybe they have taken two biology classes … (And maybe a class in basic logic and philosophy of science?)
At what points within the convergence of scales should we focus? This is an important question, I think, given that the confluences seem to be relatively easier to recognize and define within the hard sciences, whereas exploring the influence for any given phenomenon tend to become more difficult when entering the softer sciences or when dealing with disciplines of any study that discourages polymaths. Scales of art – Societies Markets Artists Narratives Style/Devices Nuerons Looking at this I would assume that Neurons (or peoples psychochemical responses/emotional responses to art) would be an area that would be important to study. What would the Scales of Religion look like and what areas are of particular concern?
I think Phillip is onto something here! What’s important that could come out of this? (i’m not really too concerned about my psychochemical responses to art), however it is important that belief and faith in God as an intelligent designer can live in harmony with Biology without having to deconstruct and re-imagine either of them! I can’t resist – Daniel, after you write a paragraph, do you re-read it to yourself and think “yeah, that’s so friggin profound that I don’t even get it myself!”. Just joshin’ ya… TA