Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community
Category

Darwinism

What? David Berlinski and Gunter Bechly reply to Jerry Coyne … at Quillette?

It would be fun to discuss the history of life for once without the dead hand of Darwin overruling all. From the looks of things, it may also be possible now. Read More ›

Karsten Pultz: The perils of talking about ID He wonders, should he give up?

I am seriously considering abandoning giving ID-talks in Christian settings, as it seems completely purposeless and because I find it exhausting, depressing and frustrating. While atheists and theistic evolutionists reject ID because they consider it creationism, the creationists reject ID because it is not creationism Read More ›

Michael Egnor: Did consciousness evolve to help us “find love”?

Egnor: How tight a link might we expect between reproductive success and the contemplation of truth? Not a lot, it would seem, if the experience of philosophy majors on the dating scene is any measure. Read More ›

Jonathan Bartlett: Can computers simply evolve greater intelligence, Avida-style?

The failure to do so is consistent with Bill Dembski’s notion of displacement. Put simply, to develop complex functional systems, you can shift design around but you can’t actually get rid of it. Read More ›

David Gelernter in a more accustomed role… asking rude questions about Facebook’s $billions

Gelernter: But why is it [Facebook] so valuable? Because we have all given it our information. It just seems to us that if this information makes Facebook such a huge amount of money, why don’t we make some of the money… we, meaning the users? Read More ›

Hybridization—long considered a “dead end”—may be key to rapid speciation

“And hybridization — long considered an evolutionary dead end — instead acts as a catalyst for combining old gene variants in new ways, fueling rapid diversification.” Surely, it was long considered a dead end because Darwinism was supposed to account for these changes. Read More ›

A cry from grievance culture: She never learned Darwinism in school

If Darwinists had been in charge of Khazan’s education, she would mainly have a bunch of stuff to unlearn. As it is, she can start with Suzan Mazur’s Darwin Overthrown: Hello Mechanobiology and Michael Behe’s Darwin Devolves. Steve Meyer’s Darwin’s Doubt is good on the Cambrian explosion… Read More ›

Another Darwinian mass shooting?

Maybe Darwinian naturalism can’t count as a motive in principle because it is Approved. That said, this story reminds some of us of two things: The Columbine massacre and Finnish massacre, where the shooters’ belief in Darwinism was even more explicit. And also the curious case of Eric Pianka. Read More ›

New: Another philosopher openly dumps Darwinism, cites its acceptance of deception

Budziszewski is onto something here. In a Darwinian universe, there is no reason not to lie to achieve a survival goal. In the traditional universe, classically assumed to exist by most human civilizations, morality is intrinsic to the nature of the conscious entities of the universe. Read More ›