[MD] Dawkins a Materialist

[ian glendinning]

Thanks for the link Platt,

Case, as if to prove my point Platt is able to claim "science doesn't
know", when in fact he means "conventional GOF-science doesn't know".

Platt, you said
"Are the rules elusive just because we can't solve the equations or
because something fundamentally new happens when we increase numbers
and levels of complexity? Opinions vary ..."

I say Platt, that "or" is the misleading item. the "Equations" of an
older simpler science will clearly break down when they run up against
problems they can't address - science is always contingent, and
self-correcting to use Case's term. Situation normal near the leading
edge of any science.
We cannot solve new problems with old thinking, some famous old geezer
once said. Causality and "prediction" are not what they used to be.

Clearly until "society" catches up with what passes for science in
terms of "intellect" there will always be differences of "opinion",
but that's a social issue.

Ian

On 1/2/07, Platt Holden <pholden at davtv.com> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Fascinating article in today's NY Times entitled "Free Will: Now You
> Have It, Now You Don't." It touches on many subjects discussed here
> including causality, quantum physics and emergent properties. Most of
> all, it describes challenges by some scientists to the  notion of free
> choice, the sine qua non of a moral value system, not to mention a
> metaphysics of quality.
>
> I particularly like the author's view of emergent phenomena when he
> asks, "A knowledge of quarks is no help in predicting hurricanes --
> it's physics all the way down. But does the same apply to the stock
> market or to the brain? Are the rules elusive just because we can't
> solve the equations or because something fundamentally new happens when
> we increase numbers and levels of complexity? Opinions vary about
> whether it will ultimately prove to be physics all the way down, total
> independence from physics, or some shade in between, and thus how free
> we are."
>
> In other words, science doesn't know.
>
> You can find the article at:
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/02/health/02essa.html
>
> Platt
>
> moq_discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>