|
Philosophy Religions, schools of thought, matters of importance and navel-gazing |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
04-23-2004, 12:19 PM | #1 |
The urban Jane Goodall
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,012
|
Intelligent Design. Science or an evolution in marketing for creationism?
I attended a seminar about the new "wedge" plan of Intelligent Design proponents yesterday and it made me wonder about the cellarites.
What do you guys think?
__________________
I have gained this from philosophy: that I do without being commanded what others do only from fear of the law. - Aristotle |
04-23-2004, 12:32 PM | #2 |
I think this line's mostly filler.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: DC
Posts: 13,575
|
Intelligent Design is not science. It is philosophy, and not particularly interesting philosophy at that. Saying that evolution is guided by an undetected external intelligence adds nothing to science except distraction.
__________________
_________________ |...............| We live in the nick of times. | Len 17, Wid 3 | |_______________| [pics] |
04-23-2004, 12:46 PM | #3 |
When Do I Get Virtual Unreality?
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Raytown, Missouri
Posts: 12,719
|
It is a backdoor scam for the Religious Right.
What I want to know is, what if we discover we were seeded by aliens? Does that make *them* God in the eyes of the Creationists, or do they just add them to the created mix?
__________________
"To those of you who are wearing ties, I think my dad would appreciate it if you took them off." - Robert Moog |
04-23-2004, 01:27 PM | #4 |
whig
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 5,075
|
Crock of shit and sham science as a backdoor for christian fundies to sound vaguely legitimate.
__________________
Good friends, good books and a sleepy conscience: this is the ideal life. - Twain |
04-23-2004, 01:51 PM | #5 | |
I think this line's mostly filler.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: DC
Posts: 13,575
|
Quote:
They don't understand (deliberately in many cases) that the reason that ID isn't science is that there is no conceivable way to disprove (or prove, without cooperation from the IDer) it. Thus, it is philosophy. Or, more accurately, an idea which could be fodder for philosophical discussion.
__________________
_________________ |...............| We live in the nick of times. | Len 17, Wid 3 | |_______________| [pics] |
|
04-23-2004, 04:55 PM | #6 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Yup, its just one more variant of "God created the fossils." If anybody is interested in reading a very elegant and well articulated discussion of evolutionary biology, I suggest "The Blind Watch Maker," by Richard Dwarkins.
|
04-23-2004, 05:15 PM | #8 |
I am meaty
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Posts: 1,119
|
I have no problem with people who believe in Creationism until they start trying to force their beliefs upon others. Especially when they try to twist science into supporting their viewpoint.
Anyone who declares ideas to be facts based solely on science's inability to disprove them is engaging in nothing more than philosophical masturbation.
__________________
Hot Pastrami! |
04-23-2004, 06:16 PM | #9 | |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Quote:
|
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|