User talk:Student of philosophy

Plantinga and Theistic Evolution

Hi Student of Philosophy,

Personally, I don't want to buy into the debate over whether or not Plantinga's Evolutionary argument against naturalism is, or is not, compatible with Theistic Evolution. However, I have just added links to audio and text of Plantinga's Biola lecture on EAAN where he concludes that a traditional theist (i.e. Jewish, Moslem, or Christian theist) "may indeed endorse some form of evolution; but if she does, it will be a form of evolution guided and orchestrated by God." - see the penultimate paragraph of the [text of the lecture].

As a person who has taken extensive interest in the EAAN article, I thought this may be of interest to you. Muzhogg (talk) 21:23, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Discussions on Talk:EAAN

Hi SofP,

Thanks for your positive response to my remarks on Talk:Eaan.

I was witness to a bit of a revert war on another page where one editor kept removing material from the article. I notice this stopped when the material was entered on the talk page. This might have been because the disenting editor was actually trying to suppress the information due to POV issues, or (more charitably) because there were contentious issues that really did merit discussion. From that I picked up the clue that the best way to keep deleted material "on the radar" is to take it immediately to the talk page and ask for justification as to why is should not be included.

I think it's a construcive approach and hope it helps you get your point across on EAAN.

Regards, -- Muzhogg (talk) 23:00, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I will take this route the next time. I got once again blocked from editing the page for a week, so it will take a while until I'll participate again. --Student of philosophy (talk) 10:40, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again, Guettarda has strongly suggested my contributions to EAAN are inappropriate - you can see the discussion on my talk-page. I'm trying to resolve this problem and have volunteered to take a break from editing EAAN for the next month in order to allow things to settle. I'd be more than happy to discuss any issues about EAAN on my talk-page - but thought I should let you know not to expect any comment by me at the EAAN article itself. I do tend to agree with your latest comments re the Plantinga bio material - it is entirely irrelevant to the question of the relation of EAAN to ID. I have, of course, been repeating over and over that claims that Plantinga is an ID advocate require support from WP:RS. I don't know of any such sources and I think it's precisely the absence of any verifiable claims by Plantinga which is making the bio material such a hot topic. Guilt by association isn't, of course, an argument. -- Muzhogg (talk) 23:01, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm convinced Guettarda wants to push his agenda on EAAN. He has pretty much disputed anything that might be interpreted as "supporting" EAAN or giving it any weight, no matter where the material came from (even rather peripheral issues like the devemopement of the argument). And if he wasn't able to remove the material because it was properly sourced, he just shortened it to give it less weight. I'm not surprised he considers more moderate approaches inappropriate. I replied to some of the topics in the article discussion page but maybe it's a good idea to let the article aside a while and discuss EAAN on a talk page instead. Maybe we could get some philosophers to participate and see if we can build some consensus there. --Contributions/194.124.140.39 (talk) 09:20, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have no comment to make on Guettarda. As mentioned, I intend taking a month off from that article and I will deal with any misrepresentations of my position upon my return. Needless to say I will monitor the discussions in the meantime. As for the rest, I think finding a few people with a philosophy background may not be a bad idea. Clearly the article does need some input from people who are interested in discussing the specifics of EAAN and who have a familiarity with the literature. -- Muzhogg (talk) 18:59, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to have a private discussion, if I may. Should you be interested, then you can e-mail me through the link on my talk-page. -- Muzhogg (talk) 22:07, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]