Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,913 Year: 4,170/9,624 Month: 1,041/974 Week: 368/286 Day: 11/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   ID Failing--at Christian Institutions
Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 3992
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005
Member Rating: 7.5


Message 1 of 38 (265343)
12-03-2005 9:50 PM


A piece by Laurie Goodstein appearing in tomorrow's NY Times looks at how Intelligent Design is striking out at Christian academic institutions and, intriguingly, already struck out at the conservative Templeton Foundation.
You can check the full article out here if you are signed up with NYT:
Intelligent Design Might Be Meeting Its Maker
First, from the Templeton Foundation:
The Templeton Foundation, a major supporter of projects seeking to reconcile science and religion, says that after providing a few grants for conferences and courses to debate intelligent design, they asked proponents to submit proposals for actual research.
"They never came in," said Charles L. Harper Jr., senior vice president at the Templeton Foundation, who said that while he was skeptical from the beginning, other foundation officials were initially intrigued and later grew disillusioned.
"From the point of view of rigor and intellectual seriousness, the intelligent design people don't come out very well in our world of scientific review," he said.
They wanted to give money away to ID researchers and couldn't draw a single proposal.
How about Christian schools?
Goodstein notes:
While intelligent design has hit obstacles among scientists, it has also failed to find a warm embrace at many evangelical Christian colleges.
Does she back that up? You bet.
From Vanguard University, a Pentecostal institution:
"It can function as one of those ambiguous signs in the world that point to an intelligent creator and help support the faith of the faithful, but it just doesn't have the compelling or explanatory power to have much of an impact on the academy," said Frank D. Macchia, a professor of Christian theology at Vanguard University, in Costa Mesa, Calif., which is affiliated with the Assemblies of God, the nation's largest Pentecostal denomination.
Wheaton Univ., an evangelical university:
At Wheaton College, a prominent evangelical university in Illinois, intelligent design surfaces in the curriculum only as part of an interdisciplinary elective on the origins of life, in which students study evolution and competing theories from theological, scientific and historical perspectives, according to a college spokesperson.
At Baylor, a Baptist univ. and former home of William Dembski:
Derek Davis, director of the J. M. Dawson Institute of Church-State Studies at Baylor, said: "I teach at the largest Baptist university in the world. I'm a religious person. And my basic perspective is intelligent design doesn't belong in science class."
Mr. Davis noted that the advocates of intelligent design claim they are not talking about God or religion. "But they are, and everybody knows they are," Mr. Davis said. "I just think we ought to quit playing games. It's a religious worldview that's being advanced."
And what does the Discovery Institute think?
John G. West, a political scientist and senior fellow at the Discovery Institute, the main organization supporting intelligent design, said the skepticism and outright antagonism are evidence that the scientific "fundamentalists" are threatened by its arguments.
"This is natural anytime you have a new controversial idea," Mr. West said. "The first stage is people ignore you. Then, when they can't ignore you, comes the hysteria. Then the idea that was so radical becomes accepted. I'd say we're in the hysteria phase."
My, my. A scientist who regards skepticism as evidence of hysteria: isn't that like one preacher seeing another preacher's faith as a sign of demonic possession?
I think that's hysterical, too, Mr. West, and I'll sleep a little better tonight
This message has been edited by Omnivorous, 12-03-2005 09:50 PM

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by roxrkool, posted 12-04-2005 1:49 PM Omnivorous has replied
 Message 4 by RAZD, posted 12-10-2005 7:55 PM Omnivorous has not replied
 Message 8 by coffee_addict, posted 12-11-2005 3:49 PM Omnivorous has not replied
 Message 10 by jar, posted 12-11-2005 4:08 PM Omnivorous has not replied
 Message 19 by nator, posted 12-12-2005 9:24 AM Omnivorous has not replied

  
Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 3992
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005
Member Rating: 7.5


Message 3 of 38 (265792)
12-05-2005 1:51 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by roxrkool
12-04-2005 1:49 PM


Most Christian Academics More Sensible Than IDers
To be fair, rox, I think it indicates that most Christian academics, scientists and otherwise, do not subscribe to the intellectual flim-flam of ID.
But I share your sardonic regard of the Kansas redefinition.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by roxrkool, posted 12-04-2005 1:49 PM roxrkool has not replied

  
Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 3992
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005
Member Rating: 7.5


Message 6 of 38 (267660)
12-10-2005 9:28 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by arachnophilia
12-10-2005 8:55 PM


Re: just cause it bears repeating (or is that bares?)
i got a real kick out of that first quotebox. i mean, they offered money for id! and no proposals came in!
That's what astounded me: ID failed an is-it-science acid test right there. What scientist worth her salt wouldn't respond to a direct invitation to seek grant money from a sympathetic, well-heeled grantor?
OTOH, what would they study? How would they spend the money?
Bill: It all looks highly designed and irreducibly complex to me.
Bob: Me, too, Bill.
Bill: Well, let's hire somebody to type that up!
ID boils down to about a single sentence of bare assertion. They are dodging the lab for all they're worth and with good reason. To be fair, it also bears repeating that the overwhelming majority of Christian-affiliated universities seem to want nothing to do with it.

Just because as we dig a little deeper, our notions change does not mean the discoveries are not useful.--randman

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by arachnophilia, posted 12-10-2005 8:55 PM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by RAZD, posted 12-11-2005 10:02 AM Omnivorous has not replied
 Message 17 by arachnophilia, posted 12-12-2005 12:36 AM Omnivorous has replied

  
Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 3992
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005
Member Rating: 7.5


Message 12 of 38 (267860)
12-11-2005 6:36 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by randman
12-11-2005 3:57 PM


Re: I wouldn't count ID out.
randman writes:
The fact research money was reportedly available, but no one took them up on it is very interesting. You guys see it as a failure of ID. I see it as evidence ID can get research money, and if the scientists it was offered to turned it down, I strongly suspect you will see some that get some grants for specific research.
Rand, re-read (or read, eh?) the OP. The foundation invited grant proposals from ID scientists so that ID research could be funded: no proposals were received.
No ID researchers were offered any money because they failed to offer any proposals. So it certainly is NOT evidence that "ID can get research money"--it is evidence they cannot produce minimally acceptable research proposals.
The point is not that ID scientists turned down money; they weren't offered any money, for the simple reason that they couldn't come up with any proposals for minimally rigorous scientific research.
The irony, of course, is that IDers whine endlessly about being suppressed by the scientific establishment.
ID is still on the rise.
Pull!
KA-POW!
Pull!
This message has been edited by Omnivorous, 12-11-2005 06:45 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by randman, posted 12-11-2005 3:57 PM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by randman, posted 12-11-2005 10:24 PM Omnivorous has not replied

  
Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 3992
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005
Member Rating: 7.5


Message 18 of 38 (268085)
12-12-2005 9:00 AM
Reply to: Message 17 by arachnophilia
12-12-2005 12:36 AM


Re: just cause it bears repeating (or is that bares?)
arachnophilia writes:
what person couldn't find a way to spend some grant money?
Bingo.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by arachnophilia, posted 12-12-2005 12:36 AM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by arachnophilia, posted 12-12-2005 2:54 PM Omnivorous has replied

  
Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 3992
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005
Member Rating: 7.5


Message 25 of 38 (268289)
12-12-2005 3:48 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by arachnophilia
12-12-2005 2:54 PM


Re: just cause it bears repeating (or is that bares?)
arachnophilia writes:
i mean, like, book publishing, fancy dinners, lots and lots of mousetraps. i could find LOTS of stuff to do with grant money.
A little grant money would certainly further my intelligent designs.

Save lives! Click here!
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by arachnophilia, posted 12-12-2005 2:54 PM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by arachnophilia, posted 12-13-2005 3:22 PM Omnivorous has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024