|Novella: Reading your take down of Casey Luskin and dealing with them ourselves I just can't help but feeling about the guys at the Discovery Institute that they are so intellectually dishonest and disingenuous that I can't escape that conclusion whenever I read what they write, which I do more often than I probably should for my own sanity. What do you think about that? First of all, do you agree with that assessment? And second, how can we make that more plain to the public that, really, these are intellectual scoundrels?|
Miller: Well, I try really hard not to look too deeply into the motivations of people I strongly disagree with, in part because when someone raises a series of points that I think are bogus, like Mr. Luskin did earlier this year, I think the least effective way to get back at them is an ad hominem attack in which you say you're intellectually dishonest, you're lying, and so forth.
I think the most effective way is to say, okay, let's see what Mr. Luskin said, here's point number 1, here's point number 2. Here's why point number 1 is incorrect, here's why point number 2, and so forth. Because what you then don't degenerate into is a whole bunch of name calling. And what you do show people is that, quite frankly, the evidence and the facts are on your side.
So I may secretly harbor some of the same sentiments that you just expressed about people who work and write for the Discovery Institute, but I don't think that expressing those views are the most effective way to combat them. I think the most effective way is with the facts.