Philosophy
Science is about metaphysical naturalism – Science & Education paper
If there is a moral landscape, is Sam Harris’s book a map?
“We know scientists are lying when they always produce on time results that conform to the establishment theory”
Alvin Plantinga: Design is apparent in the world, but that’s not an argument
ID Foundations, 10: Alfred Russel Wallace takes on the attitude and assumptions behind methodolical naturalism
(Series)
Alfred Russel Wallace is the all but forgotten co-founder of modern evolutionary thought. His major book reveals a bit of why, right from the title and sub-title: The World of Life: a manifestation of Creative Power, Directive Mind and Ultimate Purpose.
In short, Wallace was a design thinker, and in fact he was also a supernaturalist. (A Spiritualist, actually.)
It should be no surprise to see, therefore, that he took on the methodological naturalism that was even then beginning to be informally institutionalised in science. (In our time, it has now been formally written into redefinitions of science promoted by bodies like the US’s National Academy of Science and their National Science Teachers Association, in the teeth of serious historical, logical and epistemological issues and concerns.)
It is worth pausing for a few moments in this series of posts, to reflect on how Wallace responded to Hume et al, in his An Answer to the Arguments of Hume, Lecky, and Others, Against Miracles.
Clipping from p. 112 on, we may see: Read More ›
They said it: “atheism is simply the absence of belief that any deities exist” — a fatal worldview error of modern evolutionary materialist atheism
It is an open secret that a major motivation for the commonly encountered, too often angry rejection of the design inference is a prior commitment to Lewontinian evolutionary materialistic atheism; a common thread that unites a Sagan, a Lewontin, many members of Science institutions and Faculties of Universities, and of course many leading anti-design advocates like those associated with the US-based National Center for Science Education [NCSE], as well as leading “science” [–> atheism] blogs and Internet forums and the like.
Such atheists also often imagine that they have cornered the market on scientific rationality, common-sense and intelligence, to the point where professor Dawkins of the UK has proposed a new name for atheists: “brights.”
By contrast, he and many others of like ilk view those who object to such views as “ignorant, stupid, insane or . . . wicked.” (Perhaps, that is why one of the atheistical objectors to UD feels free to publicly and falsely accuse me of being a demented child abuser and serial rapist. He clearly cannot see how unhinged, unreasonable, irrational, uncouth, vulgar and rage-blinded his outrageous behaviour is.) Read More ›
Marcelo Gleiser on “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.”
If you think science can replace philosophy, read this
Remembering Paul Feyerabend – “third greatest 20th century philosopher of science”
William Lane Craig’s UK tour (October 17-26) next-to-final itinerary
On settled science, and the need for scientists to unsettle it
Michael Shermer of Skeptic magazine vs. “turtles all the way down . . .”
UD’s resident journalist, Mrs Denise O’Leary, notes on how Mr Michael Shermer of Skeptic Magazine and Scientific American (etc.) has written on his new book, The Believing Brain: Why Science Is the Only Way Out of Belief-Dependent Realism:
. . . skepticism is a sine qua non of science, the only escape we have from the belief-dependent realism trap created by our believing brains.
While critical awareness — as opposed to selective hyperskepticism — is indeed important for serious thought in science and other areas of life, Mr Shermer hereby reveals an unfortunate ignorance of basic epistemology, the logic of warrant and the way that faith and reason are inextricably intertwined in the roots of our worldviews.
To put it simply, he has a “turtles all the way down” problem:
What was the alleged “Dominionist” theologian, Francis Schaeffer, doing back in the 1950’s – 80’s?
One of the recent brouhahas in the rising “silly season” of the 2012 US election cycle, is how certain ID-friendly candidates such as Mrs Michelle Bachmann, are allegedly Christo-fascist “Dominionists” influenced by that nefarious “Dominionist,” the late theologian, Francis Schaeffer.
All of this is in a context where, in the recent Aug 17, 2011 B4U-ACT pro pedophilia conference, we heard academic advocates asserting that:
Our society should “maximize individual liberty. We have a highly moralistic society that is not consistent with liberty.” [Cf.onward UD post here.]
Of course, this patently and potentially destructively confuses license for true liberty, as can be easily seen by comparing the classic definitions in the Webster’s 1828 Dictionary: Read More ›