Welcome to Terrell Clemmons: Questions on Methodological Naturalism

[Mercer (John Mercer)]

@dga471

Right, but theologians are also not qualified to make judgments about science. I hope we agree on that one too.

One of the theologians here certainly doesn’t agree:

@Eddie

All three of them [Behe, Denton, and Shapiro] have read vastly more than Collins in both contemporary and historical evolutionary theory…He’s a great geneticist, but nowheresville as an evolutionary theorist.

I think we can agree that someone who claims to know whether someone knows more than someone else is making quite a judgment.

I’m surprised that Eddie didn’t vehemently disagree with you here. Maybe he just missed it.

Strangely enough, a 15-second search revealed this paper:
https://www.jci.org/articles/view/34772

I invite Eddie to elaborate on his judgments of the deficiencies of Collins’s understanding of evolutionary theory in the context of this paper. I’m sure he’d have no problem writing pages of critique on the evolutionary section of this review.

@dga471

Reading the writings of many theologians who try to separate “data” and “interpretation” only reveals their naivete about science as it is actually practiced and talked about by scientists in the scientific community.

I couldn’t agree more. It also applies when theologians try to separate “theory” from “technical” work. They don’t realize that particularly in biology, the same people do both.

I’m shocked that Eddie hasn’t responded to that!