My good friend and colleague Jeffrey Schwartz (along with Mario Beauregard and Henry Stapp) has just published a paper in the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society that challenges the materialism endemic to so much of contemporary neuroscience. By contrast, it argues for the irreducibility of mind (and therefore intelligence) to material mechanisms.
Tom Schneider, “Mr. Biological Information” himself and one of my critics, seems genuinely concerned about the welfare of my soul, though in his case he wants to help me find my way out of my religious faith. Here are two articles that he recently recommended to me:
Guillermo Gonzalez has issued the following response to the attacks leveled at him following the June showing of the Privileged Planet at the Smithsonian:
The irony is that Shallit and Elsberry are making a name for themselves by parasitizing my work.
Charlie Townes, Nobel laureate and the most recent winner of the Templeton Prize, has an interesting interview in which he leaves some room for ID (go here).
“By Design or by Chance?” wins two top honours June 20, 2005, Toronto At the Write! Canada convention awards night (June 17, 2004), By Design or by Chance?, an overview of the intelligent design controversy, won two Canadian Christian Writing Awards, one in the category of books on culture and the other in the category Read More…
CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES SETTLES LIBEL CLAIM OVER EVOLUTION ARTICLE Parent’s Claim Sparked by False Article by Leading Darwin Advocate ROSEVILLE, CA — The California Academy of Sciences has settled with a California parent, Larry Caldwell, who raised a potential libel claim against the organization over its publication of a false and defamatory article authored Read More…
Professor Ruse’s new book suggests that the religious resistance to evolutionary theory is a lot more understandable and a lot less unreasonable than its opponents recognize.
Check out this book review by Christine Rosen from the June 13 issue of the Weekly Standard — go here. A few quotes to whet your interest:
Here’s a blurb from the June issue of Advances, the AAAS monthly newsletter:
I received this from a colleague in the UK on the the parallels between the ID debate and the environmentalism debate.
“To sum up: [The hallmark of empirical progress is not trivial verifications: Popper is right that there are millions of them. It is no success for Newtonian theory that stones, when dropped, fall towards the earth, no matter how often this is repeated. But, ] so-called ‘refutations’ are not the hallmark of empirical failure, as Read More…
Smithsonian Distances Itself From Controversial Film http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/01/AR2005060101986.html By Tommy Nguyen Washington Post Staff Writer Thursday, June 2, 2005; Page C01 The controversy over the Smithsonian Museum of Natural History’s decision to allow a documentary based on “intelligent design” — the theory that life is so meticulously complex that a divine intelligence must have designed it Read More…
Baylor’s eclectic approach to gathering faith-and-learning resources meant they sometimes failed to screen out the culturally militant elements of evangelicalism. In a head-shaking blunder, Sloan’s team put William DembskiÃ¢â‚¬â€point man for the Intelligent Design movementÃ¢â‚¬â€in charge of a new science-and-religion center. It’s hard to imagine any step that would have been more effective in convincing skeptical faculty that Sloan was turning Baylor over to the fundamentalists.