Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community
Category

Popular culture

Q: “What does the design theory debate have to do with the law of non-contradiction (LNC)?” A: “A lot!”

The latest flare-ups in the debates over design theory in and around UD have pivoted on the Law of non-contradiction; one of the most debated classical principles of logic. Why on earth is that so? The simple short answer is: if we are to make progress in debates and discussions, we must be at minimum agreed on being reasonable and rational. In more details, LNC is one of a cluster of first principles of right reason that are pivotal to core rationality, and for years now, debates over design theory issues have often tracked back to a peculiar characteristic of the evolutionary materialist worldview: it tends strongly to reject the key laws of thought, especially, identity, excluded middle and non-contradiction, Read More ›

Marking up ES’s attempted rebuttal of the Law of Non-Contradiction on perceived implications of Quantum effects

I have of course put in my own overall rebuttal to ES’s reply to SB’s challenge, but I feel a commentary on points will also be helpful. U/D, Feb 20: I have taken up the general LNC issue, here.) Such is best done using a full post, so, I clip from EL’s own post. My comments will be on numbered arrow points, and will be OLIVE GREEN: +++++++++++++ [EL:] On Uncommon Descent, Barry Arrington asks: [BA:] Let’s clear up this law of noncontradiction issue between StephenB and eigenstate once and for all. StephenB asks eigenstate: “Can the planet Jupiter exist and not exist at the same time in the same sense? That’s a “yes or no” question eigenstate. How do Read More ›

The mutilation of Bibi Aisha — a test case on the objectivity of moral judgements

Several days ago, UD news raised the above case, and the response of a class of students, as a test case on the objectivity of morality. Further details — and a shocking picture of a beautiful but mutilated girl that we all need to examine, painful or not — are here.  In deference to sensibilities, I will ensure that the shocking graphic is below the fold.) 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

Prof. Dawkins of the UK, a leading evolutionary materialist and atheist

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 ›

New blog: Darwinism is dead but won’t lie down

Here’s a new, UK-based blog, The Darwin Deception,

Darwinism as an explanation for life is dead. The final death blow was administered by discoveries about intracellular nanomachinery, which amply satisfy Darwin’s own test of falsification. Dead, but it won’t lie down. …

Dude: Darwinism and a multitude of other dead ideas and popular delusions are crowded so thick, they can’t fall down when they die. Read More ›

Science – when does the circus leave town, or does it?

Dave Coppedge (yes, that Cassini specialist who got fired from JPL) identifies “sciences” that ain’t. These days,  every fad, trend, and crackpot alley on offer struggles to call itself science: Happiness science: Advice found online: “the best way to increase your happiness is to stop worrying about being happy and instead divert your energy to nurturing the social bonds you have with other people.” Did that come from a religious counselor or family member? No, it was on Science Daily, touting what “psychological science” has concluded. Live Science added material on “why were’re not happy” and “how to be happy” based on research by psychologists at the University of Denver.Gossip science: Live Science presumed to explain “Why we love juicy Read More ›

Online journalism thinkmag addresses politics pretending to be science

“Beware of Science as Political Veneer” warns Tom Price at Miller-McCune report (May 13, 2011), because “Scientization of politics,” not just politicization of science, weakens scientific integrity.” That includes … “scientization of politics” — portraying all government decisions as science-based when, in fact, most aren’t.[ … ] “Some [government] decisions are based on the best available science,” said Francesca Grifo, director of the Union of Concerned Scientists’ Scientific Integrity Program. “A lot of decisions end up being based on whatever values the politicians were elected to uphold.” That’s OK, she said, as long as the politicians don’t pretend those decisions were science-based. Trouble is, they usually do. Go here for more. Some say that openly discussing a problem like this Read More ›

When ID types go – to church …

A friend insists that this song by Oklahoma’s Carrie Underwood underscores and responds to design in the universe: This performance occurred several weeks ago, and then went viral. Five and a half million hits on YouTube; I’m sure some of you must have seen and heard it. The lyrics in the first stanza are certainly relevant to the design inference. Your mileage may vary. Check it out. One response was “I am not religous at all…but it is impossible after hearing this song? not to feel something… truly unbelievable.” Song’s history here. A classic, very influential rendition here. Lyrics here.

Eugenics and the Firewall: Interview with Jane Harris Zsovan 1

Aurora Borealis (Northern Lights), near Fort McMurrayJane Harris Zsovan, author of Eugenics and the Firewall talked to Uncommon Descent recently about her book on the controversial topic of social Darwinist eugenics in Western Canda in the mid-twentieth century.

Denyse: The thing that struck me, reading your book, was how widespread the idea was in the province of Alberta, that sterilizing “socially challenged” people was a great idea. You write, “Many early eugenicists were leftists, but most important, Social Darwinist ideas behind right-wing eugenics absolved the wealthy of responsibility to help the poor.” (p. 8.) True, and many were pastors and churchgoing people. Today’s evangelicals would likely have a hard time believing that, but it’s a fact.

 

 


Read More ›

Old leftist zings new atheist

It builds on you because he makes his key point last.

In “Same Old New Atheism: On Sam Harris,” (The Nation May18, 2011), Jackson Lears critiques new atheist Sam Harris’s view of morality, beginning with an account of evolutionary psychology that could have come from this desk,  and then…  Read More ›

Coffee!! Can mathematics illuminate politics?

Here’s a discussion at New Scientist on proportional representation vs. “first past the post”: Can mathematics help? On 5 May, the UK will hold a referendum to determine which voting system the country should use in future elections, with voters asked to decide whether they want to adopt the alternative vote (AV) or stick with the first-past-the-post (FPTP) system, which is currently used. Can mathematics tell us which system is the most fair?[ … ] Highlighting a more radical solution is David Maclver, a software engineer with a background in mathematics. In 1963 economist Kenneth Arrow proved that no voting system can satisfy a few reasonable and democratic conditions – in other words, democracy is always unfair. MacIver points out Read More ›

Coffee!! She reported it: Why the public should always believe “science”

WORLD GETTING CRAZIER, HE SAYS. IN A FEW HUNDRED YEARS THE WHOLE EARTH WILL BE OUT OF ITS MIND London Aug.1. The vision of a mad world and an era of lunacy was prophesied by Dr Forbes Winslow yesterday while expressing his dissent from the statement made at the Eugenics Congress by Dr Mott that increase in lunacy is more apparent than real. Dr. Winslow said: “There will be more lunatics in the world than sane people three hundred years hence. This prophecy is based on the present rate of the growth of lunacy revealed by recent returns. We are rapidly approaching a mad world. In every part othe world civilization is advancing and so insanity is bound to advance. Read More ›