1) Evolutionary theory is just that. A theory.
2) Creationism is neither a theory nor a law. Applying science to the investigation of Creationism -- which is a tool for investigating the natural world -- is simply using the wrong tool.
3) I don't for a second object to the investigation of life, of biology, of psychology from a naturalist perspective. My concern comes when an evolutionary ideology becomes central to the science. When we inject personal biases -- whatever they may be -- into science, then we do bad science.
4) So, for example, let's investigate the brain. Let's see if we can understand the nature of consciousness. Let's try to understand the sense of self. But let's not overstep the process of asking questions and assume at the outset that consciousness is merely a biological process and now we have to investigate and find a way that adequately explains HOW it's a biological process. The conclusions should come from the science, not from any ideology.
2) Creationism is neither a theory nor a law. Applying science to the investigation of Creationism -- which is a tool for investigating the natural world -- is simply using the wrong tool.
3) I don't for a second object to the investigation of life, of biology, of psychology from a naturalist perspective. My concern comes when an evolutionary ideology becomes central to the science. When we inject personal biases -- whatever they may be -- into science, then we do bad science.
4) So, for example, let's investigate the brain. Let's see if we can understand the nature of consciousness. Let's try to understand the sense of self. But let's not overstep the process of asking questions and assume at the outset that consciousness is merely a biological process and now we have to investigate and find a way that adequately explains HOW it's a biological process. The conclusions should come from the science, not from any ideology.