Comments on: Controversy Over Strengths and Weaknesses

By: obxneil

obxneil — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 14:14:18 +0000

I’ve long toyed with the idea of becoming a biology teacher in order to be on the front lines of this paltry debate, and test my solution to it. Simply put, I would indeed bring intelligent design into the science classroom:

“Okay students, today we’re going to test for the identity of the designer, as its identity is only implicit these days. Susie, being that the Hindu mythology is, relatively speaking, far more accurate in its timescales, I want your group to devise experiments for testing the Hindu pantheon, and build a theoretical framework for the necessity of a caste system to the functioning of the universe.
“Bill, you and your group do the same for the Mayan mythology (also more accurate in timescales), but pay particular attention to how human sacrifice might be essential to keep the planets in orbit, and the sun from imploding. This could have dramatic benefits to averting global warming.
“Shaniqua, your group needs to devise experimental determination between Jewish, and Northwest American Indian accounts of the special creation of man. You should determine whether man is made from dust, or perhaps clay miraculously brought to life, or from the blood of a nefarious lizard slain by a clever, talking fox. If it is indeed lizard blood, I expect your group to identitfy the species.
“Art, your group will study flood impacts on aquatic lifeforms. Calculating the dilution consequent from flooding the Earth above Mt. Everest, devise a mechanism by which saltwater lifeforms could survive. Our local pet store has generously donated several tanks worth of saltwater life.
“Nikki, your group should devise a testable hypothesis regarding the retreat of glaciers as a victory of the Norse gods over frost giants, and the extinction of large mammals in North America as collatoral damage from the conflict.
“Tyler, your group is to test the vegetarian animal hypothesis of the Garden of Eden. Using 40 species of strict carnivores, feed them a purely vegetarian diet and note the results. If promising, we’ll then take strict herbivores, and attempt to transform them into carnivores.
“Melanie, your group is to test all of the Greek creation myths, but in particular, I want a meta-analysis of the evidence of gold, silver, and brass-fashioned races that purportedly preceeded mankind’s creation, and devise a plausible biology for them.”
I have high hopes for this kind of approach. Finally, some real scientific treatment as to the identity of the designer, and the mechanisms for creation. Darwin wouldn’t stand a chance.

By: It’s the Thought that Counts » Blog Archive » Secular, not atheist

Tue, 21 Apr 2009 13:38:40 +0000

[...] to teaching children to be atheist or enforcing atheism upon the nation. Steven Novella’s recent post rebutting Michael Egnor includes an example of this. (Responding to a blogger, Egnor writes, “Perhaps Mr. Sandefur [...]

By: HHC

HHC — Wed, 15 Apr 2009 21:45:59 +0000

Wouldn’t U.S. student efforts be better directed toward learning
current law as it applies to Texans instead of learning a creation myth which demands submissive thought processes? How do you develop good citizenship? By allowing your state citizens as the Texas Criminal Courts did to burn the flag if you don’t like current political issues? If you throw out texts on science and evolution how do you create critical thought? Morality doesn’t begin in school, you are a part of the community from birth onward. You don’t grow up in a vaccum even if you live in Texas.

By: artfulD

artfulD — Wed, 15 Apr 2009 21:10:44 +0000

Something else of the what’s not to like category:

SCIENCE TALK PODCAST
Why People Believe What They Do
University of California, Berkeley, psychologist Tania Lombrozo talks about why people believe what they do, especially regarding evolution or creationism.
http://podcast.sciam.com/weekly/sa_podcast_090410.mp3

By: DevilsAdvocate

DevilsAdvocate — Wed, 15 Apr 2009 17:45:34 +0000

Dr. Evidence: “The Egnor Incompleteness Theorem”

Oh, I like that.

By: artfulD

artfulD — Wed, 15 Apr 2009 17:41:08 +0000

Steven,
I will agree to disagree on the nature of purpose, except that if one defines it the same way as Egnor would like us to, we give him that advantage. In the end, it’s nothing more than a human concept that his like use or misuse to activate their mythologies.
A quibble as to whether an organism’s purpose is to survive rather than to evolve. As a concept, it may just as well be that of evolving to survive. At the mechanistic level of the organism itself, it may be no more than ensuring some probability of getting the next shot of energy. And then the next and so on. Evolution by increment!

By: John Pieret

John Pieret — Wed, 15 Apr 2009 15:34:26 +0000

While the Persephone example is a good one, what about the “metaphysical implications” of Egnor’s own specialty of pediatric neurosurgery? Every successful outcome he has implies that Christian Science and its belief that all disease is the result of spiritual failings is wrong. By cutting out tumors or correcting other defects in physical brain tissue, instead of only praying over them, he is supporting an atheistic and materialistic view of disease. Maybe we should teach students, including his patients, that there are gaps in our knowledge of disease and let them make up their own minds if Egnor is unnecessarily and cruely cutting open childrens’ brains.

Or, on the other hand, we can act like sane adults.

By: Steven Novella

Steven Novella — Wed, 15 Apr 2009 14:19:53 +0000

I don’t want to get bogged down in a discussion of the definition of “purpose”. Yes, individuals act with purpose. However, I don’t think their purpose is to evolve (it’s just to survive), and even more, it is not to evolve to a specific outcome. Therefore there is nothing guiding evolution.

I think evolution is best understood as something that just happens when varying organisms struggle for survival. It’s like water seeking its lowest level – it doesn’t “want” to get there, it’s just something that happens as a consequence of the laws of physics.

But I agree that there is apparent purpose in evolution, although it is an illusion the creationists assume it is the consequence of a supernatural entity.

The exact same thing applies to the concept of “design”. Ambiguities in the definition can be exploited to argue that the appearance of design implies a designer. But design too can result spontaneously from the bottom-up as a blind consequence of evolution. No one “designed” life, yet life has design – design as a consequence of life evolving, like water seeking its lowest level.

By: mindme

mindme — Wed, 15 Apr 2009 13:52:29 +0000

It took me a bit to get it but “DiscoTute” refers to the Discovery Institute. Disco + ‘tute.

doh.

Incase anyone else was confused and thought Dr. N. was referring to a message board troll.

By: Apollo

Apollo — Wed, 15 Apr 2009 08:33:18 +0000

“Yet instruction in metaphysics isn’t limited to philosophy classes. Much of what children learn in science class about evolution has profound metaphysical implications.”

Reading this made me laugh. Does Egnor even know what Metaphysics is?