Here is what Kant had to say about “retractions.”
It seems to me if Creationists want to retract in
suspenso without doubting the debate itself then there is nothing wrong with power plays during the time the doubt moves interestingly beyond a provisional judgment to one that ibecomes more than reflexiveif not conviction itself. The privacy to decide one way or the other needs be sustained in the process. Patterns however do not lie on determination.
quote:
Rather, I have heard Will Provine, an evolutionist say (last spring in a lecture on Intelligent Design and IDEA at Cornell)that he needed to “retract” a paper on free will, or rather his 'idea' that there is none, from concurrent publication with Creationists. If words such as “retraction” have any meaning at all he should not have doubted the public's ability to read but he should have let the will and power of the people decide. Is that the same as making something true by fiat? no. Just because a post is linked to another in the debate is not the last connection.
Of course if telling others to not use "evidence" merely "because it does not suit my end and interest to decide," then yes, making *that* become true is against even common sense. It is not always easy to push a button and be on the inside of a creationist's mind when one is not one.
™ Version 4.2
