[MD] Dawkins a Materialist (is watching?)

[MarshaV]

At 01:30 PM 1/19/2007, Ian wrote:

>[Arlo]
>What do you mean "would have been", I'd say "had been". But this just
>underscores the two-faced agenda of the "intelligent design" crowd. I have
>argued several times in our local school district for a "comparative 
>mythology"
>course. Each time, and I mean _each_ time, the suggestion is squelched by
>_Christians_ who would hear NOTHING about any _other_ "God" mentioned in
>school. It has been made clear to me, under no uncertain terms, that 
>any course
>that _lowers_ Christianity to a comparable "myth" with other world mythologies
>would be rejected outright. These are the same people who argue the next day
>for "intelligent design". Now do you _really_ think these people want ID to be
>a metaphor? Do you really think they want the Tao taught in schools? Or the
>Buddha? Or the Norse account of creation? Or Goddess mythology?
>
>The day you can stand up in school and say "Christianity is a useful 
>metaphor to
>understand the human condition, and like other world metaphors which we will
>examine as situated cultural analogies on par with the Occidental mythologies,
>is useful only when one remembers 'all this is just an analogy', and one
>analogy among many, all of which speak to parts of the human 
>experience equally
>and with valid voice. Buddha, Christ, Kuan Yin, White Buffalo Calf Woman (two
>male, two female) are metaphors. Let's explore them.", I'll drop my
>condemnation of the theist/ID crowd and support their cause.
>
>I truly believe Ian means well, and likely could indeed make a cogent argument
>for "intelligent design" as an "anthropological metaphor" for 
>Quality. But this
>is not what the ID crowd wants, like others on this board, they want 
>complexity
>and diversity and beauty to be "proof" of a "God"... and from there 
>its a short
>jaunt (as Mark implies, if I read him correctly) to "my God". Would it be that
>the ID crowd were interested in metaphor and art and analogy. Sadly, they are
>interested in literal, theistic dogma to replace "science". That is 
>the agenda.
>
>So I am cautious in between a crowd that sees "intelligent design" 
>as a means to
>bring literal Christianity into our schools as a plausible and equal
>alternative to "reason", and a philosophy discussion group that uses
>"intelligent design" as an "anthropological metaphor" to further our
>understanding of the cosmos.

Hi Arlo,

I can still remember the day I threw my family bible in the garbage, 
and piled on leftovers and coffee grounds.  It's such crap.

Bravo for trying to get a comparative mythology course.  Please keep trying.

Marsha