|May 13, 2018||Posted by News under Education, Intelligent Design, Naturalism, Video|
From multiverse cosmologist Sean Carroll we learn that eighty videos are about to hit YouTube: Some of you might be familiar with the Moving Naturalism Forward workshop I organized way back in 2012. For two and a half days, an interdisciplinary group of naturalists (in the sense of “not believing in the supernatural”) sat around […]
|November 20, 2017||Posted by kairosfocus under info in nature & the future of Sci-Tech, Science, Stirring the pot (tentative thoughts/explorations), UD's Sci-Tech watch, Video|
This needs to go in the Sci-tech watch department for UD: Not directly relevant to ID debates, but a glimpse at the wonders of our world that are well worth pondering. END
|July 14, 2017||Posted by News under Informatics, Information, Intelligent Design, Video|
Don Johnson is the author of Programming of Life and Programming of Life 2: the Earth These vids introduce the ideas. See also: Don Johnson’s lecture on “Bioinformatics: The Information in Life”
|May 11, 2017||Posted by Joshua G under Biology, Courts, Darwinism, Evolution, Food for thought, General interest, Media, Naturalism, Science, Video|
For the last year or so I have been accumulating quite a number of YouTube playlists. Recently I’ve been trying to get it a little more organised and cleaned up, so I thought I would point readers to it as a resource. At the moment I have just under 40 individual playlists. I have created […]
|December 2, 2016||Posted by johnnyb under Complex Specified Information, ID Foundations, Intelligent Design, Video|
I’ve found that a lot of people who are interested in Intelligent Design are nonetheless unaware of the mathematics behind it. Therefore, I decided to do some videos teaching the basic ideas.
|November 12, 2016||Posted by johnnyb under Animal minds, Artificial Intelligence, brains and computation vs contemplation, Comp. Sci. / Eng., Mind, Minds, Naturalism, Neuroscience, Video|
John Searle gives a nice talk at Google about real intelligence vs. machine intelligence. The conversation is interesting for a number of reasons, including some historical background of Searle’s famous “Chinese Room Argument.”
|September 13, 2016||Posted by kairosfocus under General interest, Geo-strategic issues, Lessons of History, Politics/policy and origins issues, Video|
Video: embedded by Embedded VideoYouTube Direkt (Please understand this i/l/o the context of complacency, attack and the lesson of Jan Sobieski. Ask yourself, in your heart is our civilisation worth fighting for given the likely alternatives (or, does it deserve to die . . . or be utterly “transformed”), and why or why not?) Ponder, […]
|August 2, 2016||Posted by kairosfocus under Books of interest, Functionally Specified Complex Information & Organization, Intelligent Design, Logic and First Principles of right reason, Mind, Video|
Video: embedded by Embedded VideoYouTube Direkt Blurb at the Amazon page for the book: >>Throughout his distinguished and unconventional career, engineer-turned-molecular-biologist Douglas Axe has been asking the questions that much of the scientific community would rather silence. Now, he presents his conclusions in this brave and pioneering book. Axe argues that the key to understanding […]
|July 15, 2016||Posted by johnnyb under Naturalism, Philosophy, Science, Video|
In this next video from the Alternatives to Methodological Naturalism (AM-Nat) conference, Rope Kojonen defends methodological naturalism by suggesting that the foundation for its objections is the belief that science is the only valid way of knowing.
|July 13, 2016||Posted by johnnyb under Intelligent Design, Naturalism, Philosophy, Science, Science, Mathematics, Philosophy and (Natural) Theology, Video|
In the next installment of videos from the AM-Nat conference, Jim LeMaster discusses Francis Bacon and David Hume, and shows their issues with teleological thinking in science, and why the arguments against analogies don’t measure up. We have a conference coming up in November focused on biology, and another in February focused on business and […]
|July 8, 2016||Posted by johnnyb under Naturalism, Philosophy, Science, Video|
In the next video from the Alternatives to Methodological Naturalism conference, Jonathan Bartlett describes the philosophical underpinnings of methodological naturalism and why they fall short. For more information about the Alternatives to Methodological Naturalism (AM-Nat) conference series, see the website. We have two more conferences coming in the next year!
|July 5, 2016||Posted by johnnyb under Intelligent Design, Naturalism, Philosophy, Science, Video|
In this presentation from the AM-Nat conference, Mario Lopez points out the possibility that design itself may be able to serve as a neutral descriptor of what counts as science, where here “design” serves as a general description, not necessarily Intelligent Design.
|July 4, 2016||Posted by johnnyb under Naturalism, Philosophy, Physics, Science, Video|
In this presentation, Tom Gilson describes regularism, intended to be a metaphysically neutral philosophy of science to replace methodological naturalism. Regularism is intended to focus on the things that the scientific methodology needs to operate properly rather than assumptions about what it will discover. Find out more information about the Alternatives to Methodological Naturalism conference.
|June 29, 2016||Posted by johnnyb under Biophysics, Engineering, Genomics, Intelligent Design, Naturalism, Video|
In this next installment from the Alternatives to Methodological Naturalism (AM-Nat) conference, Salvador Cordova gives us his perspective on epistemology, which he calls “Gambler’s Epistemology,” which intends to be a metaphysically neutral way of analyzing claims based on their costs and payoff possibilities. Cordova shows that naturalism does not have a history of high payoffs, […]
|June 26, 2016||Posted by johnnyb under Comp. Sci. / Eng., Informatics, Intelligent Design, Video|
This video is from the Alternatives to Methodological Naturalism 2016 conference held earlier this year. It deals with using non-naturalism in order to improve the quality of machine learning programs using a technique called “imagination sampling.” The results of a limited test run are given.
|June 11, 2016||Posted by kairosfocus under Back to Basics of ID, Functionally Specified Complex Information & Organization, ID Foundations, Intelligent Design, Privileged planet, The Design of Life, Video|
Here: embedded by Embedded VideoYouTube Direkt Let us watch and ponder, then discuss. END Posts
|March 22, 2016||Posted by kairosfocus under Geo-strategic issues, News, Of General Interest, Off Topic, Video|
The developing pattern of terrorist attacks in the West continues. Looks like a bombing at an airport and a metro station in Brussels after a terrorist mastermind was captured Friday last. It seems so far, 26 dead, dozens wounded. The airport bombing may be a suicide bombing. Sky News, live: embedded by Embedded VideoYouTube Direkt […]
|March 18, 2016||Posted by News under Evolution, Intelligent Design, News, Video|
Biophysicist Cornelius Hunter debates “Is Evolution Compelling.” Cornelius Hunter versus Michael Ruse, March 11, 2016. Note: Hunter often writes here at Uncommon Descent. We are trying to get vid of Ruse too. See also: Steve Meyer vs. Lawrence Krauss in Toronto this Saturday, live-streamed Follow UD News at Twitter!
|March 2, 2015||Posted by kairosfocus under Darwinist rhetorical tactics, Logic and First Principles of right reason, Popular culture, Science, worldview issues/foundations and society, Selective Hyperskepticism, Video|
Here: embedded by Embedded VideoYouTube Direkt And while one may have reservations or quibbles about particular cases, the overall point is well taken. In her article on a “top ten” list of astro-turfers, she comments, soberingly: What’s most successful when it appears to be something it’s not? Astroturf. As in fake grassroots. The many ways […]
And while one may have reservations or quibbles about particular cases, the overall point is well taken.
In her article on a “top ten” list of astro-turfers, she comments, soberingly:
What’s most successful when it appears to be something it’s not? Astroturf. As in fake grassroots.
The many ways that corporations, special interests and political interests of all stripes exploit media and the Internet to perpetuate astroturf is ever-expanding. Surreptitious astroturf methods are now more important to these interests than traditional lobbying of Congress. There’s an entire PR industry built around it in Washington . . . .
Astroturfers often disguise themselves and publish blogs, write letters to the editor, produce ads, start non-profits, establish Facebook and Twitter accounts, edit Wikipedia pages or simply post comments online to try to fool you into thinking an independent or grassroots movement is speaking. They use their partners in blogs and in the news media in an attempt to lend an air of legitimacy or impartiality to their efforts.
Astroturf’s biggest accomplishment is when it crosses over into semi-trusted news organizations that unquestioningly cite or copy it.
She then probes, more analytically:
The language of astroturfers and propagandists includes trademark inflammatory terms such as: anti, nutty, quack, crank, pseudo-science, debunking, conspiracy theory, deniers and junk science. Sometimes astroturfers claim to “debunk myths” that aren’t myths at all. They declare debates over that aren’t over. They claim that “everybody agrees” when everyone doesn’t agree. They aim to make you think you’re an outlier when you’re not.
Astroturfers and propagandists tend to attack and controversialize the news organizations, personalities and people surrounding an issue rather than sticking to the facts. They try to censor and silence topics and speakers rather than engage them. And most of all, they reserve all their expressed skepticism for those who expose wrongdoing rather than the wrongdoers. In other words, instead of questioning authority, they question those who question authority.
That seems to be highly relevant to the longstanding case of debates surrounding design theory, and I therefore beg us to heed the point in Aristotle, The Rhetoric, Bk I Ch 2, that pathos, ethos and logos are the three key levers of persuasion. Also, his hint that warped and especially hostile emotions and/or undue and blind adherence to presenters or experts may easily warp sound judgement.
Accordingly, I note:
1 –> PATHOS: Our emotions, while quite persuasive, are no more sound than the underlying perceptions, judgements, expectations and values.
2 –> ETHOS: No presenter or authority is any better than his facts, reasoning and assumptions, backed up by his character.
3 –> LOGOS: It is only when claimed facts accurately say of what is that it is (and of what is not that it is not), present to us the material truth and surround such with correct and reliable steps of reasoning that conclusions are to be trusted.
I trust this will help us as we deal with the controversies surrounding design theory and thought . . . as well as with (sometimes, apparently organised) trollish misbehaviour, and far more generally than that. END