{"id":5005290,"date":"2005-11-22T16:02:02","date_gmt":"2005-11-22T15:02:02","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/criticalbiomass.blog.hu\/2005\/11\/22\/schonborn_es_id"},"modified":"2005-11-22T16:02:02","modified_gmt":"2005-11-22T15:02:02","slug":"schonborn_es_id","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/criticalbiomass.hu\/?p=5005290","title":{"rendered":"Sch\u00f6nborn \u00e9s ID"},"content":{"rendered":"

Tov\u00e1bbra sem halad j\u00f3l az intelligens diz\u00e1jn (ID) mozgalom szekere. A napokban George Coyne atya ism\u00e9t vil\u00e1goss\u00e1 tette<\/a>, hogy szerinte az elm\u00e9let \u00e1ltudom\u00e1ny (“Intelligent design isn’t science even though it pretends to be”<\/i>)
\n\u00e9s lassan el\u00e9ri a t\u00edzezres nagys\u00e1grendet azon papok \u00e9s lelkip\u00e1sztorok
\nsz\u00e1ma, akik a vall\u00e1s valamint az evolucionizmus \u00f6sszef\u00e9rhet\u0151s\u00e9ge
\nmellett teszik le a garast (Clergy Letter Project<\/a>).
\nS\u0151t, Christoph Sch\u00f6nborn, b\u00e9csi \u00e9rsek is kicsit vil\u00e1gosabban fogalmazta
\nmeg az ID-hez val\u00f3 viszony\u00e1t (b\u00e1r az\u00e9rt engem egy kicsit a delphoi
\nj\u00f3slatokra eml\u00e9keztet nyilatkozata). Egyr\u00e9szt b\u00e1r szimpatiz\u00e1l az ID azon
\nalapgondolat\u00e1val, hogy az \u00e9let komplexit\u00e1sa egy fels\u0151bb tervez\u0151
\njelenl\u00e9t\u00e9re utal, ezen gondolatmenet\u00e9t (az ID mozgalommal sz\u00f6ges
\nelent\u00e9tben) nem tudom\u00e1nyra hanem \u00e9sszer\u0171s\u00e9gre alapozza. A Reuters-nek adott interj\u00faj\u00e1ban<\/a>
\nmegism\u00e9tli egyik nem t\u00fal r\u00e9gi kijelent\u00e9s\u00e9t, miszerint a klasszikus kreacionizmus nem tudom\u00e1nyos
\nelm\u00e9let \u00e9s a kereszt\u00e9ny\u00e9nys\u00e9g kompatibilis az evol\u00faci\u00f3 gondolat\u00e1val\n<\/p>\n

“The biblical teaching about creation
\nis not a scientific theory,” he said, restating a Catholic view that
\ncontrasts with the literal reading of some conservative U.S.
\nProtestants opposed to Darwin. “Christian teaching about creation is
\nnot an alternative to evolution.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

valamint azt is hangs\u00falyozza, hogy a Vatik\u00e1n fenntart\u00e1sai a neoDrawinizmussal szemben els\u0151sorban filoz\u00f3fiai jelleg\u0171ek:<\/p>\n

\n“Although his reading on evolution has covered several scientific
\ndisciplines, Schoenborn stressed his objections to neo-Darwinism were
\nessentially philosophical. Like his mentor Pope Benedict, he is deeply
\nconcerned that materialism — the science-based view that matter is the
\nonly reality — is crowding out religious and spiritual thinking in
\nmodern man’s perception of the world. “It’s all about materialism,
\nthat’s the key issue,” he said.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

V\u00e9lem\u00e9ny\u00e9nek ut\u00f3bbi r\u00e9sze igen korrekt, hiszen az “\u00e9rtelmes
\ntervezetts\u00e9g” k\u00e9rd\u00e9s\u00e9t “n\u00e9v\u00e9rt\u00e9k\u00e9n”, azaz (vall\u00e1s)filoz\u00f3fiai k\u00e9rd\u00e9sk\u00e9nt
\nkezelve, a r\u00f3la val\u00f3 vit\u00e1t \u00e1temeli abba a paradigma-rendszerbe, ahova
\nval\u00f3. <\/p>\n

\n

El\u0151zm\u00e9ny: Habemus Designatorum?<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Tov\u00e1bbra sem halad j\u00f3l az intelligens diz\u00e1jn (ID) mozgalom szekere. A napokban George Coyne atya ism\u00e9t vil\u00e1goss\u00e1 tette, hogy szerinte az elm\u00e9let \u00e1ltudom\u00e1ny (“Intelligent design isn’t science even though it pretends to be”) \u00e9s lassan el\u00e9ri a t\u00edzezres nagys\u00e1grendet azon … Egy kattint\u00e1s ide a folytat\u00e1shoz…. →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[1],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/criticalbiomass.hu\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5005290"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/criticalbiomass.hu\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/criticalbiomass.hu\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/criticalbiomass.hu\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/criticalbiomass.hu\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=5005290"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/criticalbiomass.hu\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5005290\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/criticalbiomass.hu\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=5005290"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/criticalbiomass.hu\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=5005290"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/criticalbiomass.hu\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=5005290"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}