ID thinker Phillip Johnson answers questions relating to Darwinism and underlying metaphysical and methodological naturalism:
Notice his summary from Gould etc: that in the intent of the main champions of “evolution,” material reality is reality, and science, properly, is limited to that circle of thought, so scientific reality is factual reality, and what is contrary to or outside of that circle of evolutionary materialism is imaginary.
Now, too, he quotes Gould: “science incorporates all of factual reality.” Is that a reasonable position to take, why or why not?
Ask, too, whether he is accurate in summarising an attitude of contempt that willfully conceals disputable prior philosophical commitments in dealing with lay policy makers (e.g. school boards) and the general public.
Is he right to hold that natural selection — due to the requisites of step by step functional intermediates — will be a conservative force allowing adaptations of body plans [i.e. within an island of function], but blocking traversal of genome space to novel body plans?
Why, or why not?
Let’s watch then think and discuss. END