Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Inferring onward, from design to designer

One of the notorious talking points used by inveterate objectors to design theory, is that it is about stealth creationism. Closely tied, is the suggestion (or, assumption) that the claim that design inference on empirical sign only warrants inference to design as process is a dishonest stalking horse. Given a long saddening track record of career and hobbyist objectors, unsurprisingly, that is false. A simple case — and “case” is itself significant — easily shows why. About seven years ago, one night, fires broke out in two of Montserrat’s court houses, and did considerable damage (including to records). After they were put out, investigators found signs of accelerants. For cause, they inferred arson. However, they were unable to infer onward Read More ›

Epigenetic learning appears confirmed in nematodes; Weismann barrier broken

If this trait turns out to be widespread, it may help explain some puzzling aspects of animal behavior: specifically, how animals that are definitely not able to learn much individually appear to know things. Read More ›

Rob Sheldon: What that hot new quantum experiment really showed

His view: What this recent paper with a qutrit experiment shows, is that it is possible to do QM communication or QM computing at high volume and high speed. No need to wear headphones. Our view of the universe has not changed. Read More ›

Total Darwin Rewrite in progress: “Survival of the fittest” now means “sympathy”

Funny how so many people, whether they agreed with Darwin or not, got it so wrong all these years … How did it get to be called “social Darwinism” anyway, as opposed to, say, “social Florence Nightingale-ism”? Read More ›

Mind vs Matter: the Result of an Error of Thought

(I think we’ve corrupted KF’s thread long enough.) The entire problem of mind/matter dualism is rooted in a single error of thought: the reification of an abstract descriptive model of experience into an causal agency independent of the mind that conceives it and the mental experience it is extrapolated from. It is similar to the same error of thought that mistakes “forces” and “physical laws” and “energy” as independently existing causal agencies, when in fact they are abstract models of various mental experiences. All experience and all thought about experience takes place in mind, regardless of whether or not it is caused by something external to mind. Therefore, “an external, physical world” is a mental abstraction about mental experiences. Insisting Read More ›

Theoretical physicist: Recent claim about big quantum mechanics find is “silly”

Maybe the main thing to see here is that lots of people would love to falsify or tame quantum mechanics, the way they would like to falsify the Big Bang or fine-tuning and it won't be their fault for lack of trying. Read More ›