Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community
Category

worldview

The relevance of ethical and worldview issues pivoting on scientific schools of thought

How dare you appeal to . . . conscious agents in science!

Sometimes, comments at UD can be quite revealing. Jan 25, AIG objected in the Shermer/Flannery Wallace debate thread in an inadvertently revealing way, which I have picked up: ___________ >>AIG: Re: questions of how, why, and “who” (the names of people involved [at Stonehenge etc]?) are secondary. We know that human beings were present at the time these were built, so everybody agrees that human beings were responsible . . . . “Agency” is a term from philosophy (mainly moral philosophy and philosophy of mind). It is also used in sociology, where it refers to people (human beings) in social systems. It is not a term used in biology, physics, or the cognitive sciences . . . This is utterly, Read More ›

Is Killing Scientists to Stop Their Research a Threat to Science?

I know – the answer seems obvious. But let’s put this in context.

Iranian scientists are being killed, apparently in connection to their research on nuclear power. I’ll add that their deaths can’t reasonably be chalked up to collateral damage – say, someone blowing up a facility and a scientist ends up caught in the blast there. No, these are apparently incidents of scientists specifically being targeted and killed owing to what they’re researching and the practical, or at least possible, outcomes of said research.

Now, the particular politics of the Iran situation isn’t what interests me here – what I’m interested in is that some people (indeed, some people motivated largely by secular concerns) think it’s not only permissible to stop a scientist from conducting research, but it can be imperative to the point that killing him is justified. The interesting thing is, if someone is sympathetic to the idea, they seem to be sympathetic to the following claim: scientific knowledge and research needs to be tightly controlled, with some research off-limits for some, possibly all, people. Put another way, sometimes brutally squashing scientific research – being anti-science – is necessary.

There are a lot of interesting questions and considerations that could come up from this line of questioning, but there’s one particular issue I think this draws attention to.

Read More ›

Unwelcome history: the roots and fruit of the Eugenics movement — “Eugenics is the self-direction of human evolution”

(NOTICE: Dr Larry Moran, the response to your assertions is here.) I see where UD’s News has let us know that the Eugenics Society’s papers will shortly be digitised and made available to the public. It is therefore appropriate to highlight again the Logo for the 2nd International Congress on Eugenics, with Alexander Graham Bell as honorary president and Major Leonard Darwin (son of Sir Charles) as major speaker, so we can see how leading people all across the world from North Carolina, California and Canada to Britain,  India, Japan and — sadly tellingly — Germany, were thinking about “the self-direction of human evolution”: It is worth noting — from Wiki testifying against interest as usual — that Major Darwin’s Read More ›

FOR RECORD: What we are dealing with . . . an example of web stalking and vandalism

This morning, I had occasion to visit a blog based course site I have developed, for working with a church in the Caribbean. This is a sample of the stalking and vandalism I discovered there, from the hate site owner: xxx, the religious wacko who owns and runs this site, blames all the world’s ills, including Hitler and the nazis, on Darwin, atheists, and material evolutionists. To see the truth about Hitler and the nazis, see these XXXXXXX: XXXXXX is a LYING, arrogant, bloviating, sanctimonious, ignorant, uneducated, abusive, delusional god zombie. See this site for a lot more about XXXXX: November 18, 2011 3:17 AM Now, this vandalism of a site wholly unrelated to the matters debated at UD (and Read More ›

FOR RECORD: CSU Professor Richard Weikart’s Lecture: From Darwin to Hitler

Since the question of the history of ideas roots of a certain Herr Schicklegruber’s thoughts seems to repeatedly come up, it is worth the while to here post the Lecture “From Darwin to Hitler,” by Prof Richard Weikart so that we all may see what he has to say: [youtube w_5EwYpLD6A] For record, so no comments. Comments may continue in the current “Who said this?” thread, here. My own view is simple: no responsible discussion of this topic or related concerns can ignore the evidence brought forward by prof Weikart here. END _______________ U/D Jan 5: CSU not UC, Thanks to an eagle-eyed reader.

Ideas for carrying design thinking forward into the world of education and industrial transformation

As we go into the holiday weekend, it may be worth the while to reflect on how design thinking and key associated ideas — here, especially the von Neumann self-replicator — could help play a role in transforming education, industry and agriculture. Details, here . . . A happy Christmas and a prosperous new year to all! END

NOTICE: Abusive spammers know (or should know) the price of dialogue on serious matters — basic civility

Pardon a moment. Just a notice to let the abusive spammers know that the price tag for serious dialogue is basic civility.  (And in some cases, a lot of uncalled for stuff — for cause — would have to be removed and apologised for. Why should I or any sensible person let you do the verbal equivalent of repeatedly dumping garbage on my front lawn?) Oh, a follow-up snippet from my comment inbox, to see some of why I say this: . . . Where’s the “serious dialogue” here on your worthless site and in your threads on UD? Blocking and banning people who speak the truth isn’t “serious dialogue”. You don’t have the slightest clue as to what “serious Read More ›

NOTICE, in response to attempts to play the “the God of the OT is a moral monster” distractive rhetorical games

Earlier today, I have had to deal with an attempt by a commenter who — for cause — was already of an ilk I have asked not to comment on threads I post here at UD, as such are simply rudely disruptive and distractive; making no genuinely positive contribution to serious dialogue. Given his insistence on being further disruptive, I was forced to shut down comments for the thread. I have taken time at my personal blog, to respond for record to the cluster of issues raised in that earlier post, and have placed as a footnote to the original post, the following: I have further explained what is going on, here, highlighting the implicit, enabling antisemitic significance of attacking 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 ›