|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total) |
| |
popoi | |
Total: 915,807 Year: 3,064/9,624 Month: 909/1,588 Week: 92/223 Day: 3/17 Hour: 1/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: ID Failing--at Christian Institutions | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Omnivorous Member Posts: 3978 From: Adirondackia Joined: Member Rating: 7.3 |
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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
roxrkool Member (Idle past 988 days) Posts: 1497 From: Nevada Joined: |
Hmmm... that's very interesting. Even the Evangelical schools are finding ID lacks science. I wonder if they've tried changing the definition of science (a la Kansas) to look at ID... heh
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Omnivorous Member Posts: 3978 From: Adirondackia Joined: Member Rating: 7.3 |
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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1404 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
bump
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1343 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
i got a real kick out of that first quotebox. i mean, they offered money for id! and no proposals came in!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Omnivorous Member Posts: 3978 From: Adirondackia Joined: Member Rating: 7.3 |
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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1404 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
To my mind it exposes the whole ID movement as a scam.
scamn : a fraudulent business scheme [syn: cozenage] v : deprive of by deceit; "He swindled me out of my inheritance"; "She defrauded the customers who trusted her"; "the cashier gypped me when he gave me too little change" coz·en v. tr.1. To mislead by means of a petty trick or fraud; deceive. 2. To persuade or induce to do something by cajoling or wheedling. 3. To obtain by deceit or persuasion. Enjoy. by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
coffee_addict Member (Idle past 476 days) Posts: 3645 From: Indianapolis, IN Joined: |
I have mentioned this in the creationist explanation of asteroids thread. Creationists and evangelical christians may be crackpots, but they are not stupid. The main stream ones tend to publically dissociate themselves from the obviously crackpot beliefs, whether they believe them or not. This is why I tend to suspect so-called creationist sources that claim incredible things that are obviously idiotic.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
randman  Suspended Member (Idle past 4898 days) Posts: 6367 Joined: |
ID is still on the rise. 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.
I can think of a lot of areas for ID research, such as: 1. Researching adaptive mutations.2. Researching degrees of non-randomness in mutations. 3. Comprehensively researching the fossil record, such as the theorized land mammal to whale evolution, to see if the numbers of fossils of theorized transitional species is what one would expect for ID or for evolutionary models. 5. Quantum physics research that could be related, except this would be hard to do unless one could fine a QM physics researcher interested in the subject. 6. Researching consciousness since presumably ID would need to include a Designer with consciousness. For example, researching NDEs more could be a start to defining what human consciousness is in terms of where it occurs. Heck, I can think of a lot of areas for research, and wouldn't mind being involved in helping to put together a group to research the fossil/transitional question, but I am not a paleontologist. So it'd have to be some others doing much of the work. This message has been edited by randman, 12-11-2005 03:58 PM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 393 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
IMHO, there is absolutely no reason for interest in or research into Intellegen Design. If the concept of ID should prove to be true, it is a moot issue anyway. If something can be changed or modified by other than natural processes it is by definition beyond our capability to implement. If that is the case, then the only possible value, and the absolute most that can be expected from ID, is a foot note somewhere saying "This (fill in the blank) was influenced by non-natural forces therefore any conclusions or observations cannot be used for understanding or predictive purposes.
Researching ID is a total waste of time. Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MangyTiger Member (Idle past 6353 days) Posts: 989 From: Leicester, UK Joined: |
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. And I strongly suspect nobody gives a flying f**k what you suspect - put up or shut up. Show us a case of actual ID research being funded.
ID is still on the rise ID might still be on the rise in terms of the social/political/religious agenda that really lies behind it, but in terms of real science it's still got what it's always had. Nothing - Squat - Zero - Bugger All - Nada - you get the picture. I wish I didn't know now what I didn't know then
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Omnivorous Member Posts: 3978 From: Adirondackia Joined: Member Rating: 7.3 |
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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
randman  Suspended Member (Idle past 4898 days) Posts: 6367 Joined: |
All zip and no substance....a good evo response.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
randman  Suspended Member (Idle past 4898 days) Posts: 6367 Joined: |
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. Assuming that is correct, I think that will change because I just thought of a bunch of good ideas for proposals, and I beleive ID scientists will take advantage of the offer of research money. You have to realize the idea is bigger than the Discovery Institute.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MangyTiger Member (Idle past 6353 days) Posts: 989 From: Leicester, UK Joined: |
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.
Assuming that is correct, I think that will change because I just thought of a bunch of good ideas for proposals, and I beleive ID scientists will take advantage of the offer of research money. Are you getting delusions of adequacy randman? So you are seriously telling us that ID is going to change from not being able to produce minimally acceptable research proposals because you came up with a bunch of good ideas on an internet forum? Either you're even more barking than I thought or you're a long-term troll who's just seeing how far he can push the edges. I wish I didn't know now what I didn't know then
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024