Intelligent Design

Dr YS, contribtes thoughts again that are well worth pondering: >>I’d like to present a summary of the arguments against the design hypothesis that I have come across either as a reader or as an author of a pro-design blog over the past 8 years since I became interested in intelligent design. The Design Hypothesis Before we do it, let us first recap on what the design hypothesis really is. It states that some configurations of matter in specific conditions are best explained as caused by purposeful activity of one or more intelligent agents. The ‘specific conditions’ means that we could not directly observe how these configurations of matter came into being and can only analyse them post-factum. ‘Intelligence’ in Read More ›

In October 2006, Nick Matzke, a name not unfamiliar to denizens of UD, and Mark Pallen co-authored a review article for Nature Review of Microbiology regarding the status of research into the evolutionary origins of the bacterial flagellum.  Matzke and Pallen felt the need to write such an article because since the publication of Michael Behe’s book “Darwin’s Black Box” ten years prior, there had been much hand waving and hand wringing over exactly what is the evolutionary explanation for the seemingly irreducibly complex flagellar system.  Matzke’s first line of attack prior to the ’06 article was to lurk various discussion threads and offer up lists of studies that supposedly provided the very thing that Behe said was nowhere to Read More ›

Many of us here were greatly influenced by Phillip Johnson’s books, articles, and lectures. Indeed, if not for Johnson, this blog might never have come to be. Like so many, I was saddened to learn of his death on November 2nd. While several of Johnson’s fellow academics and colleagues have written some wonderful tributes to him, I wanted to give one from the perspective of a layman. My tribute was published in The Stream last week and republished today over at Evolution News.

Consequentialism always winds up devouring itself, and this is why: STEP 1:  Define the “Good” That act is good which causes the most net [here insert synonym that allows one to pretend the statement is not a tautology, e.g. human flourishing, increased wellbeing, etc.].  What causes the most [net increase in flourishing]?  Since there is no standard for determining it, it amounts to a subjective call based on the person’s preferences in every instance. Thus, the good is ultimately defined as the “desirable” and the “desirable” is that which one actually, at any given moment, desires. STEP 2:  Free Oneself From Limits If result X is the good result (see above definition of “good”), what means may one employ to Read More ›

In calculus, the Leibniz notation for the second derivative confuses most students. It turns out, rightfully so. The notation for the second derivative turns out to actually be incorrect. Earlier this year, I got a paper published detailing the problem and the corrected notation. In the video below, I introduce the new notation, why the old notation is problematic, how the new notation can be derived straightforwardly, and why it may matter in the future. For those interested, the problems with the notation for the second derivative are well-known, and a kludge exists for working around it known as Faa di Bruno’s formula (a simplified version being known as “the chain rule for the second derivative”). However, this formula does Read More ›