Home Deep (Space) Doo-doo >>
September, 2005
We Interupt Our Regularly Scheduled Program
Posted by Brian Beers at 9/27/2005 10:14:00 AM (1 comment left so far)

 There is nothing like an authoritative voice speaking from the pulpit. So for the next two weeks we will publish the other two sermons in Dr. Vreeland's series on grumpy old men. This hiatus from his ongoing review of The Privileged Planet is due to the dearth of public acclaim that has befallen the good doctor. Yes. He has chosen to fulfill his responsibilities at the seminary rather than devote himself solely to improving the writing quality here at Theoblogian.org. I am sure that this is not because he considers that task to be a lost cause.

For those of you who wish to continue thinking about Intelligent Design (ID), I point you to a couple of interesting posts.

 

Over at Mere Comments James Kushiner makes some observations about the firestorm of opinions raging over ID. He also makes some interesting suggestions about how ID proponents might best advance ID. Under point 2 The idea that proponents should strive to "remove religious fingerprints" from ID discussions. This idea seems absurd since the "fingerprints" are planted by the opponents of ID. ID opponents appear to hold an endless supply of red herrings. They repeatedly dodge the scientific discussion, but this strategy is losing effectiveness. Some of the red herrings are looking well used.

Tom Gilson at Thinking Christian responds to this point by explaining the fallacy of arguing from motive. At one point he writes

Any responsible writer should know the logical fallacy of arguing from motives. If an argument is validly constructed from true premises, it matters not one bit what the arguer's motive is.

And for a refresher on what prompted  Dr. Vreeland to embark on writing an actual review of The Privileged Planet re-read his Book-review review which explains some of the academic politics at work (or play) in the ID debate.

Subscribe to comments for We Interupt Our Regularly Scheduled Program: (RSS)
Comment 1 by G. Edward:
ID

It is unfortunate that Intelligent Design has been equated to creationism.  Although there are qualified ID promoters, that equation is natural - ID/Creation/Creator/Bible/religion.  For ID to gain a respectable position as a legitimate challenger of evolution, the proponent if ID must clearly draw a line between scientific fact and what lies beyond.  One need not deny the faith element to gain a scientific, factual position in understanding the matter of life as an element of 'what is'.  They just need to keep their faith and science separate.

In a parallel consideration, evolutionists need to admit that they likewise face the difference between scientific fact and their basic theory.  Credibility forces them to face all the facts and coordinate them into a reasonable consensus.  They must admit that the circular reasoning of 'rocks determine the age of fossils found in them, and the age of the fossils is determined by the age of the rocks', does not qualify.

If the matter of 'intelligent design' must be considered only on the basis of laboratory analysis, with reasonable empirical evidence, then evolution must submit to the same standards.  The facts of biological development for all flora and fauna must be considered equally by both sides.  The inter-dependency of, and interaction between other fields of science need to be recognized.  Geology cannot be adequately understood apart from hydrology.  The first and second laws of thermo-dynamics need to be recognized and applied to all elements involved - evenly and equally.  ID can be and must be pursued apart from the readily recognized Person of The Creator.  Although there is no analogy, in the area of consumer products, an item is usually chosen on the basis of the producer's reputation.  By implication, the order within each life-form and interaction between those forms present an orderly quality which represent a superior "producer".

For ID to be effective, those in the fore-front of the action must be thoroughly scientific and challenge their opponents to meet the same standards.  There is enough credible evidence in every field of science to keep ID effective, and to cause evolutionists to reconsider.

Posted  10/12/2005 7:51:00 PM 

Leave a comment:

Name:
Email (optional):
 
Website (optional):
 
Remember me
Comment Header (optional)