Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
0 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Is Intelligent Design An Open Movement?
Spiritual Anarchist
Member (Idle past 3549 days)
Posts: 70
From: Raleigh NC
Joined: 01-27-2013


Message 39 of 91 (689458)
01-30-2013 8:36 PM
Reply to: Message 37 by AZPaul3
01-30-2013 8:10 PM


Re: My Research
You Ignored everything I said in response to you except when I called you an ahole which you freely admit. So I am just going to ignore you. I made clear I was doing research not selling anything. And that I am a philosopher so I do not have to publish to peer reviewed journals. I made a lot of other points but you responded to none of them except to try to prove you didn't quote me out of context.
But since your point was that I tried to say that ID and Evolution claimed that Everything was solved and I was only claiming that they had everything but the details which is a different claim... you quoted me out of context again and ignored my points and clarification.
In other words you are obtuse and just like to argue about nothing. You stand by what you said but you said nothing. So you stand by nothing.

My Karma Ran Over My Dogma

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by AZPaul3, posted 01-30-2013 8:10 PM AZPaul3 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by AZPaul3, posted 01-30-2013 8:39 PM Spiritual Anarchist has not replied

  
Spiritual Anarchist
Member (Idle past 3549 days)
Posts: 70
From: Raleigh NC
Joined: 01-27-2013


Message 41 of 91 (689467)
01-30-2013 9:33 PM


To Clarify My Research Intentions
I have been watch all the Debates on youtube on ID . With Dawkins Dennett, William Craig, Alvin Plantinga...etc and all I saw was the same points over and over.
And what I noticed was that all the ID proponents were Apologist/Theologians for Christianity and argued moralism as a key point in ID. This is absurd on the face of it. If in fact Evolution is true which it is this has little or nothing to do with morality.
The real Debate is between Super-naturalism and Materialism and this is a False Dichotomy.
Materialism is obviously false but so is Supernaturlism. And neither have anything to do with morality. Or the meaning of life for that matter.
If the Christians were right we would have exactly the same society we have now except for the fact that if their deity were real and as they describe him we would have all gone insane or destroyed ourselves by now. So what I mean to say is Christians would exist whether Materialism is true or not.
Which brings me to my next point. If Evolution/Materialism is right this would not change who or what we are as humans. We would still be biological machines. Some machines would be Christian in their thinking and some would not.
The debate is not about reality but about beliefs and agendas.
The Christians are worried about society becoming completely amoral without Belief in God.
The Atheist make the case that belief in God has not improved the moral imperative in society and if anything has held us back in superstitious nonsense. And that religion does not have a good record in either pursuing truth or justice.
This is my understanding of the debate of Intelligent Design.
So I came on here hoping to hear other viewpoints besides the ones expressed on youtube by the New Atheist and the ID Theologians.
I do think both have a secret agenda and that this whole thing is staged and political. I believe that The Discovery Institute has a Right Wing Agenda and it is stated on their website quite bluntly
"Discovery Institute is an inter-disciplinary community of scholars and policy advocates dedicated to the reinvigoration of traditional Western principles and institutions and the worldview from which they issued. Discovery Institute has a special concern for the role that science and technology play in our culture and how they can advance free markets, illuminate public policy and support the theistic foundations of the West."
The New Atheist are obviously the opposing Left Wing Agenda and I notice that even though groups like The Union of Concerned Scientists which back them up are actually more concerned about public policy in relation to Global Warming then Evolution as they claim when supporting The New Atheist in this debate.
Their position on ID is this
"
The Union of Concerned Scientists is an independent, nonprofit alliance of more than 200,000 citizens and scientists. We base our research and outreach on rigorous scientific analysis and the maintenance of scientific integrity in decision making among the public and policy makers.
We are gravely concerned about current attempts to mandate the teaching of intelligent design and other non-scientific accounts of the origins of species and biological diversity in our nation’s science classrooms. We are also troubled by the misleading interpretations of scientific principles being used to discredit and misrepresent the science of evolution. This misuse of science and education could have significant negative long-term consequences for American competitiveness and world leadership on scientific matters. "
But I think their real agenda is in relation to Global Warming and Public Policy that will make a whole lot of money off our Environmental Fears
Now I must Qualify this when I looked on their website it did not seem to left leaning. They did have a position on Nuclear Power that wasn't Left leaning so maybe they are legit.
But regardless how far to the left or right extremes these groups both lean The Discovery Institute and The Union of Concerned Scientists do have agendas and it seems to me this debate has nothing to do with morals God or even Evolution as much as it does to do with Changing Public Policy and generating revenue.

My Karma Ran Over My Dogma

  
Spiritual Anarchist
Member (Idle past 3549 days)
Posts: 70
From: Raleigh NC
Joined: 01-27-2013


Message 57 of 91 (689652)
02-02-2013 2:11 AM


Question For Members on this board
I am curious to know what everyone's individual position is on the topic of ID, Evolution, Pantheism, Atheism etc Is everyone here either a follower of Dawkins type thinking of Evolution "As Is" with no room for anything outside materialism (What you see is what you get naive realism ) or the opposite side Christian "Design" ?
In other words all the Proponents of ID on here for "Guided" Evolution by the "person" called God ? Are all the skeptics of ID here only skeptical of ID as a movement of The Discovery Institute? Or does it go deeper with the Skeptics on here where as in any theory outside of materialism is scoffed at?
How Polarized is this debate?
Is it an "Us" vs "Them" mentality. One political movement against another? Or are there Apolitical Non Partisan people on here that have an actual interest in Philosophy and who might take Metaphysics seriously? Is this just religion vs science?
Does one side believe that the Nature of reality is in a test tube or will be decided on experimental data and mathematical models and the other side believe the nature of reality is spelled out in Holy Books like the Bible who grudgingly accept science when it advances their agenda of spreading "godly moralism?
I guess I want to dig deeper into what I started this thread for. Not just to see if ID is an open movement but more importantly if there are people outside of this debate... looking in... searching for some truth even if it doesn't necessarily align with the status quo of science or religion. Just truth for truth sake?
Yes I know about the Logical Positivist that claimed that Empiricism is all we need. We have our 5 senses and math and all else is nonsensical or bullshit.
I also know the opposition in Theology who use our fear of moral nihilism to motivate philosophers to run screaming from scientific materialism into the arms of whatever religion is prevailing at the time.
Which right now is conveniently Christianity...Not because this religion has any self evident truths or is any more compelling then any other mythological construct... but simply because of their domination through terrorist tactics... Such as inquisitions and crusades and their perfection of brainwashing techniques coupled with their ability to revise history.
What if Science has been co-opted for political agendas no less insidious then religions need to dominate with disinformation and behavior modification? Does this concern anyone here ? Or has the truth already decided?
Is it the rational against the emotional? Or is there anyone here with enough curiosity to pursue actual inquiry no matter where that inquiry leads? Does the truth have to make you "comfortable"?
Can you describe your position without sounding like Dembski or Dawkins?
As I said before I am just curious how Polarized this debate actually is. I came to this forum specifically because I have already watched the debates between the New Atheist and The ID proponents and wondered if anyone here has anything NEW to add?
It was once said that God is a comedian whose audience is afraid to laugh.
As a Pantheist I am slowly coming to the conclusion that even if Pantheism were right the joke might be on God ...because we may be in a stage of our spiritual evolution where ironically people are so stubbornly asleep that God may not even have an audience at all.

My Karma Ran Over My Dogma

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024