Tuesday, August 30, 2005
More Intelligent Design
This time, the flaws of Intelligent Design are explained by someone full qualified.
Daniel Dennett, author of Darwin's Dangerous Idea, wrote an Op-Ed piece for the NY Times discussing Intellegent Design. He does a very nice job explaining why it should not be taught in a science class and looks are how this idea became so popular.
You may have to register, but it is worth a look:
Show me the Science
...the proponents of intelligent design use a ploy that works something like this. First you misuse or misdescribe some scientist's work. Then you get an angry rebuttal. Then, instead of dealing forthrightly with the charges leveled, you cite the rebuttal as evidence that there is a "controversy" to teach.
Daniel Dennett, author of Darwin's Dangerous Idea, wrote an Op-Ed piece for the NY Times discussing Intellegent Design. He does a very nice job explaining why it should not be taught in a science class and looks are how this idea became so popular.
You may have to register, but it is worth a look:
Show me the Science
...the proponents of intelligent design use a ploy that works something like this. First you misuse or misdescribe some scientist's work. Then you get an angry rebuttal. Then, instead of dealing forthrightly with the charges leveled, you cite the rebuttal as evidence that there is a "controversy" to teach.
# posted by Jason @ 7:45 AM 
Comments:
<< Home
This is hands-down the best analogy I've yet seen in the ID argument:
"Yes, eyes are for seeing, but these and all the other purposes in the natural world can be generated by processes that are themselves without purposes and without intelligence. This is hard to understand, but so is the idea that colored objects in the world are composed of atoms that are not themselves colored, and that heat is not made of tiny hot things."
Thanks for the link.
Post a Comment
"Yes, eyes are for seeing, but these and all the other purposes in the natural world can be generated by processes that are themselves without purposes and without intelligence. This is hard to understand, but so is the idea that colored objects in the world are composed of atoms that are not themselves colored, and that heat is not made of tiny hot things."
Thanks for the link.
# posted by 
: 5:42 PM
: 5:42 PM 
<< Home
