Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Jason Miller discovers the Wedge Document — Can you say out of touch and behind the times?

Categories
Darwinism
Evolution
Intelligent Design
Share
Facebook
Twitter/X
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

Can You Say Hidden Agenda?
by Jason Miller

August 6, 2006 at 21:17:33

The Discovery Institute’s True Raison d’être and Why We Need to Be Deeply Concerned

Discovery Institute, a Seattle-based think tank which champions socially conservative causes, has become heavily invested in the “debate” between Darwinists and those who wish to introduce Intelligent Design into public school classrooms.

According to their Website, Discovery’s stated mission is:

“… to make a positive vision of the future practical. The Institute discovers and promotes ideas in the common sense tradition of representative government, the free market and individual liberty.”

Finding a handful of academics willing to act as its shills, Discovery’s ultimate goal is to subvert the prevailing paradigm of modern science (which they refer to as “materialism”) and replace it “with a science consonant with Christian and theistic convictions”.

In an internal document called the Wedge (click the link or continue reading this piece to view the Wedge Strategy in its entirety) which was uncovered in 1999, Discovery was highly specific in stating its goals and plans to accomplish them. The institute clearly indicates that Intelligent Design will be their principal weapon and Evolution their primary target in its onslaught against “materialism”.

MORE

Comments
Actually, I kinda like the Wedge document. My favorite part is where it says that the goal is to bring together "leading scholars from the natural sciences and those from the humanities and social sciences, the Center explores how new developments in biology, physics and cognitive science raise serious doubts about scientific materialism and have re-opened the case for a broadly theistic understanding of nature." I think desiring to look at how new developments raise doubt on the materialistic paradigm is a wonderful goal. No where does this imply concocting developments or distorting them. What's so wrong with this goal? Am I missing something?tinabrewer
August 7, 2006
August
08
Aug
7
07
2006
07:15 AM
7
07
15
AM
PDT
This just in: 1995 called back and said you can keep it.Scott
August 7, 2006
August
08
Aug
7
07
2006
06:20 AM
6
06
20
AM
PDT
Jason: 1995 called and wants it's epiphany back.Scott
August 7, 2006
August
08
Aug
7
07
2006
06:20 AM
6
06
20
AM
PDT
lucID, I'm not sure what ivory tower you speak of in the case of Jason Miller. He's not a member of academia by any stretch of imagination. Here's some info about him if you care: Jason Miller has a degree in liberal arts, is passionately devoted to his avocation of sociopolitical writing, works hard to apply his core values to virtually all aspects of his being, and spends his weekdays as a wage slave (writing and publishing on evenings and weekends). As to the ``fast-changing world (of science),'' it looks the same from my ivory-tower perch.olegt
August 7, 2006
August
08
Aug
7
07
2006
05:46 AM
5
05
46
AM
PDT
To my knowledge, the Discovery Institute has never repudiated the Wedge Document, despite discussing it at length in the article "The Wedge Document: So What?" at https://www.discovery.org/f/349 If the DI is unwilling to distance itself from the Wedge Document, then what reason does Jason Miller have to disregard it as an accurate reflection of the DI's goals?zapatero
August 7, 2006
August
08
Aug
7
07
2006
01:39 AM
1
01
39
AM
PDT
Yes... Terribly out of date. Everyone should know by now that the Wedge Strategy was abandoned, replaced by the Top Secret "Thing That Holds The Door Open, But We're Not Going To Call It A Wedge... Don't Mention the Wedge" Strategy. :DMikeFNQ
August 7, 2006
August
08
Aug
7
07
2006
12:25 AM
12
12
25
AM
PDT
Can one really be surprised at this out of touch comment so late in the day?? It obviously supports the notion that some of our Darwinian brethren truly believe their own sentiments espoused towards ID briefly paraphrased as "ID will amount to nothing really". (The smart one's realise ID is a formidable foe and that the above is just towing the party line) So then we should not be surprised that from time to time when one or two ostriches pull their heads out of the lofty sand pit and crane their necks out of the ivory tower to gaze down at the fast changing world (of science) below, they will notice events of yester year as breaking-news. This will be followed by a brief episode of hysteria (flapping of wings and squawking). The end result is usually the ostrich publicly maintains the commotion through various new agencies until they feel the threat has passed (or suitably been discredited) and then it's back to the sand pit until it's time for their next breath of air. NOTE: There are certain ostriches who never return to the sand pit and who carry on the good fight from the ivory tower.lucID
August 7, 2006
August
08
Aug
7
07
2006
12:11 AM
12
12
11
AM
PDT
Just a suggestion -- but instead of these kinds of posts, can we have some posts about the actual science of ID? I did a quick survey of the last few weeks - there's hardly a single blog entry about any research or discoveries related to ID. I wouldn't mind if there was information on the "science consonant with Christian and theistic convictions” but lately there's not even been that. Instead this blog seems to me to be mosty complaining about what the evolutionists are up to, or what people say about ID (like this one). Or, there are references to papers which contain even the slightest hint of intelligent design (is that what passes for research?) I come to this blog to learn about ID - so far I've learned nothing further than what I could find at Wikipedia. I truly am beginning to wonder if "this is all there is". You people need to start walking the talk...timcol
August 6, 2006
August
08
Aug
6
06
2006
11:27 PM
11
11
27
PM
PDT
1 2

Leave a Reply