Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

14666Re: 1. closing remarks; 2. Unposted quotes #10

Expand Messages
  • Stephen E. Jones
    Jul 22, 2005
    • 0 Attachment

      T minus 1 hour and 40 minutes!

      On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 23:38:00 EDT, wdwilder@... wrote:

      DW>bye it's been informitive and interesting

      Thanks to Doug.

      On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 23:42:20 EDT, wdwilder@... wrote:

      DW>what the blog address I missed it mine is Godscienceandfaith@.../

      That blog URL did not work for me.

      Thanks for your contribution and best wishes.


      PS: This (see tagline) wa an incomplete quote in my backlog, now
      completed. That is the end of my backlog! If anyone is interested in my
      quotes, I will still keep posting them, but since I will be posting a lot less
      emails, it will be directly to my Unclassified Quotes pages
      <http://members.iinet.net.au/~sejones/cequcqts.html> for each month.

      "The reductionist approach seeks to analyze complex matters into simple
      concrete entities in exact, measurable terms. So far as we can do this, we
      master phenomena. `Reductionism is without question the most successful
      analytical approach available to the experimental scientist' (John and
      Miklos 1988, vii). Scientific reductionism deserves much credit for
      countless wonders from antibiotics to spacecraft. The successes of
      reductionism inspire the hope that fullness of understanding requires only
      more and better knowledge and analysis. That is, all natural phenomena
      should ultimately be made describable in terms of the elementary particles
      of matter, electrons, quarks, and the rest; their qualities should be
      knowable and are to be tied into a `Grand Unified Theory.' Reductionist
      science would like to see everything from physics through chemistry and
      biology to psychology as potentially or theoretically explicable in purely
      material terms. Although many phenomena are admittedly too complex for
      concrete analysis, it is the scientific faith that everything is ultimately
      learnable except why the universe exists-a question that can be ignored as
      unanswerable. Michael Ruse holds that `the whole is composed of nothing
      but its parts.... An organism is nothing but the molecules of which it is
      made' (Ruse 1988, 24). In this view, living organisms are nothing more
      than elaborate physicochemical systems, the product of genes, or nucleic
      acid sequences, reacting with their surroundings. Thoughts are the
      workings of the coordinative capacities of the organism; they are
      electrochemical phenomena, produced by neurons and their synapses with
      neurotransmitters and changes of potential across membranes. Everything
      should be mechanistically understandable as the behavior of material
      substance guided by the laws of physics. `The ultimate aim of the modern
      movement in biology,' according to Francis Crick, `is to explain all
      biology [his emphasis] in terms of physics and chemistry' (Crick 1966,
      10). Most biologists would probably agree with Crick. " (Wesson R.G.,
      "Beyond Natural Selection," [1991], MIT Press: Cambridge MA, 1994,
      reprint, p.3)
      Stephen E. Jones, BSc (Biol). http://members.iinet.net.au/~sejones
      Blog: http://creationevolutiondesign.blogspot.com/ Book, "Problems of
      Evolution" http://members.iinet.net.au/~sejones/PoE/PoE00ToC.html
    • Show all 4 messages in this topic