Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Darwinism: Science or Philosophy?: An epic debate

Denyse O'Leary
September 12, 2014
Darwinism, News
Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
arroba Email

Two eminent professors, Phillip E. Johnson and William B. Provine, debate the most important of all questions: Do we owe our existence to a creator? Can the blind watchmaker of natural selection take the place of God? Vigorous arguments and a lively question and answer period illuminate the contemporary debate between naturalistic and theistic ways of understanding our existence.

Note: Access Research Network is making a number of vids, formerly available only on DVD, online at YouTube.

Follow UD News at Twitter!

Comments
Debate? Yes. Epic? Hardly. Acartia_bogart
Provine doesn't have any evidence to support any of his claims. So that would be a problem for him. Joe
equate you state:
“Darwinism: Science or Philosophy?” A bit of both but theology was left out:
equate, I agree whole heartedly that Darwinism is primarily a Theological concern, but when you said 'a bit of both', I have to disagree. In regards to there being 'a bit of science' in Darwinism, there simply is nothing within Darwinism that would allow one to falsify it.,,, As Berlinski put the 'scientific' situation with Darwinism,,
“On the other hand, I disagree that Darwin’s theory is as `solid as any explanation in science.; Disagree? I regard the claim as preposterous. Quantum electrodynamics is accurate to thirteen or so decimal places; so, too, general relativity. A leaf trembling in the wrong way would suffice to shatter either theory. What can Darwinian theory offer in comparison?” (Berlinski, D., “A Scientific Scandal?: David Berlinski & Critics,” Commentary, July 8, 2003)
bornagain77
"Darwinism: Science or Philosophy?" A bit of both but theology was left out: Excerpt: "The essay concludes that this theology served as a handmaiden and accomplice to Darwin's science." > http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22702030 equate65
I just watched this recently. I had planned on probably commenting on aspects of it in a future post. It's an interesting debate both for its content and for the over-the-top rhetorical strategies employed by Provine. HeKS

Leave a Reply