Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community
Category

Intelligent Design

Quote of the Day

“There is no such thing as truth. Science is a social phenomenon and like every other social phenomenon is limited by the benefit or injury it confers on the community” Adolph Hitler* (or your average woke postmodern academic) When you hear a progressive talk about “white science” or “patriarchal science” or “Western science” you should hear an echo of the “Jewish science” so hated by the Nazis. The impetus behind cordoning science (or any other universal enterprise) along tribalist lines is indentical. _________ *quoted in Daniel, G. (1962) The Idea of Pre-History, London: C.A. Walts and Co, p. 147,

The Boy Who Cried “Solipsism:” The MRT Delusion Objection Is Unfounded

(No insult or mocking intended by use of the word “boy.” Those that have been redacted in other threads are given a second chance to participate here. Off-topic comments will probably be redacted. Let’s keep it civil.) The two biggest objections to Mental Reality Theory is are: (1) it is essentially solipsist, and (2) it has no means of determining between “reality” and “delusion.” I’m going to address those items in this thread. Any hypothesis that an external physical world exists must include aspects of mental reality theory or else it fails. The ERT proponent must insist there are at least three distinct categories of mental experience that are entirely real: (1) that which is correlated to the external world; Read More ›

The Rawlsian Myth of the Morally Neutral Perspective

The other day I had an exchange with a progressive about Amy Coney Barrett.  The exchange was touched off by Ms. Progressive’s comment about Barrett’s faith:  “I don’t think her religion is a problem as much as her religious convictions driving her decision making is.” I encounter this sort of muddled thinking from progressives all of the time.  And it is always based on the same progressive myth – the myth that some people (namely, progressives) arrive at their conclusions (whether the conclusion concerns a matter of policy, law, politics or whatever else) from some morally neutral and objectively rational “view from nowhere” while other people’s conclusions are based on their biases (or bigotries if the progressive is not feeling Read More ›

Hey, it’s Friday night? Anthropologists get in on “We are NOT alone!”

Of course, there’s the detail of actually finding any extraterrestrial life forms before we all fight viciously for the right to represent them as their agents and, if they are intelligent (but not especially so) get them to sign long-term contracts … ;) Read More ›

Theoretical physicist Sabine Hossenfelder is being labelled “anti-science”

Also, let this sink in: Despite believing in determinism, Hossenfelder believes we should “decide” against a new particle collider… We can decide? On that account, to other naturalists, she is “anti-science.” Naturalism is weird like that. Eats its own. Read More ›

How is that project of reintroducing lost species coming?

The interesting part will be to see whether—if both the animals and the environment have changed—reintroduction or recreation from advanced genomic techniques produces a viable independent species or a species that humans must indefinitely maintain. Read More ›

There, that’s it! Environment changes made humans more adaptable

Hey, this is a good theory as to why people needed to branch out and develop more networks. But we’re overlooking a key issue here: Humans could only do that if something already differentiated us from hyenas… It wasn’t just the environment. Read More ›