Developments in the Post-Wedge World
by MikeGeneIn our comments section, one TT member noted, "Its not real suprising that when President Bush said he supported teaching intelligent design he was only pandering to social conservatives. Since then, of course, the Dover, Pa. school board was voted out of office, Kitzmiller v. Dover was decided by a conservative Bush appointee, creationists were voted out of power on the Kansas School Board in the GOP primaries, Ohio deep sixed its ID policy, and a bunch of creationists lost in the November elections, the most prominent being Senator Rick Santorum, who couldn't run away from IDism fast enough after Kitzmiller. I'm inclined to agree with the 'Rev. Dr.' Lenny Flank that IDism is dead, dead, dead."
But it depends on what he means by "IDism."
The concept of ID is quite alive and kicking. It has been around for over 2500 hundred years and has experienced a resurgence because of the many ID-friendly discoveries in molecular, cellular, and evolutionary biology. But I agree that the socio-political movement to get some form of ID taught in the schools is dead. Welcome to the post-wedge world, remember?
An interesting development in the post-wedge world is that we now know there are a large number of ID critics who are themselves part of a developing Anti-Religion Movement. This movement is so extreme that atheistic scientists who don't bash religion are considered "part of the problem." Since almost all critics hear "God" when "ID" is spoken or written, it becomes obvious that members of this movement are far, far too biased to process questions about the concept of ID. How can they objectively discuss "evidence" of ID when a) they think ID = Religion and b) they have set out to eliminate Religion?
So as we continue to explore the concept of ID in the post-wedge world, the Evangelical Atheists have voluntarily rendered their judgments rather meaningless. Their conclusions are pre-set and their interest in this topic is simply of function of an emotionally-based socio-political agenda.
December 2nd, 2006 at 2:08 pm
Biased and also blind to real weaknesses in standard theories. Critics would like to think this is about religion but because some claims lack scientific support, ID is very much alive, alive, alive.
Comment by Bradford — December 2, 2006 @ 2:08 pm
December 2nd, 2006 at 5:18 pm
Mike:
Well, I've gotta tell you the circus over at PT has been truly amazing to me, and I'm a circus pro from way back! It's good to just sit back and let 'em self-destruct, while we pursue the mystery of TORCH THE SCENIC GOYIM. I'm ever so curious to see the next chapter!
Hypocrisy is never owned by any given faction among humans (who are prone to hypocrisy). But some of the crap I've seen at PT has to rank way up there in the anals [sic] of human tri-faced-ness (Baphomet-like as it is). It's all great fodder for some scholarly expositions on faith-based 'isms' which could come in handy someday if certain legal issues were ever to be pursued.
I personally have welcomed the PWW. This all just makes it ever much more colorful.
Comment by Joy — December 2, 2006 @ 5:18 pm
December 2nd, 2006 at 7:00 pm
Joy, I chuckle when reading your posts but then again a good sense of humor is needed for a good circus act. BTW, to change the subject a little, I came across a statement by Michael Ruse in a newspapaer article in which he indicated that he was a believer in Jesus Christ. This came as a real surprise because I had read another article in which he previously declared himself to be an agnostic. Does this information accord with anyone's understanding of his actual beliefs or was the attribution an error or what?
Comment by Bradford — December 2, 2006 @ 7:00 pm
December 2nd, 2006 at 7:38 pm
LOL!! Well, this time of year it's pretty much all-elf all the time. Papa Elf is off to the castle with juggling pins and bauble (after a wedding he performed earlier today), but Mama's still here with a rather gnarly case of "walking pneumonia" (which I figure is walking because the fever's not too high). Still, since my usual temp is significantly below 98.6, maybe not. It's a first for me, and I don't like it one bit, but young Elfis stayed home too just to wait on me and eat fudge and cookies as fast as I can make 'em.
Trying hard to avoid having to go get several thousand dollars' worth of not much care at the ER, which is all I've got since I'm odd-woman-out on insurance around here. Fever does make me a little bit silly, but that's nothing new. §;o)
I know nothing about Ruse. Sorry!
Comment by Joy — December 2, 2006 @ 7:38 pm
December 2nd, 2006 at 7:55 pm
Hi Bradford,
From this radio broadcast Ruse, after agreeing 100% with Richard Dawkins "on his science" adds,
""I agree on his religion, too."
If you go to confirm this the show has George Gilder, followed by Dawkins, and finally Ruse, briefly, at about 40 minutes.
Comment by Pez — December 2, 2006 @ 7:55 pm
December 2nd, 2006 at 8:02 pm
Anyone who cites the good "Rev" Lenny Flank as a reference has committed intellectual suicide.:lol:
Comment by Guts — December 2, 2006 @ 8:02 pm
December 2nd, 2006 at 11:05 pm
I'd go with "error" too. Ruse has on numerous occasions declared himself to be agnostic.
Comment by Krauze — December 2, 2006 @ 11:05 pm
December 2nd, 2006 at 11:24 pm
Here Ruse identifies himself as an agnostic, and in addition "He stops a crucial degree or two short of declaring himself an atheist …".
In this article his agnosticism is such that "Also, I myself share just about every bit of Dawkins's nonbelief."
Comment by Pez — December 2, 2006 @ 11:24 pm
December 2nd, 2006 at 11:42 pm
This is from the article. At the end Ruse is quoting the Catholic John Henry Newman but the next paragraph caught my attention.
http://www.heraldextra.com/con...
Comment by Bradford — December 2, 2006 @ 11:42 pm
December 3rd, 2006 at 10:01 am
Hi MikeGene,
Which is irrelevant, since as you acknowledge IDism isn't science, anyway.
When I said IDism is dead, its in the sense that MikeGene stated, as a movement to get it taught in public schools, but also in the sense that its irrelevant outside the community of enthusiasts. After all, 20 years after Edwards v. Aguillard, AiG is still promoting "scientific creationism" because there is a desire among fundamentalist christians for scientific support for YECism, its just that it doesn't matter outside of that context. MikeGene may still be blogging about IDism 20 years from now, and many of the people posting on this site will still be agreeing with him, but noone else is really going to care very much.
Comment by Aagcobb — December 3, 2006 @ 10:01 am
December 3rd, 2006 at 8:43 pm
How do you (presume to) 'post' a wedge that you didn't 'wedge' in the first place? It is obvious to almost all but those at TT's that 'the wedge' is more than being simply about 'i+d' in schools. Just gotta read the texts to figure that one out. (E.g. Philip Johnson - father figure of contemporary i+d)
But since it suits the ideology of TT's-ID to say otherwise, people here say 'NO ID IN SCHOOLS' and claim that is enough to bring about a 'post' i+d World.
Wonder that they wouldn't call it a post-CREATION world since it is temporally 'after' the CREATION of the world!?
Certainly I am not an ID-critic who is part of an anti-religion movement. That would be silly! Dawkins feels as challenged by me as do Dembski and Behe.
Yada, yada…But what 'caused/effected' the 'hunch' that Mike Gene attributes to the unidentified (agnostic) designer? Could it not be a divine source? In the beginning was the WORD?
Even in the Matrix films, when Neo denied/refused the hand of fate, it was indeed his personal fate to face his maker at the end of the war (read: evolution) between humans and machines. Perhaps it is the 'evolution of humanity' that Mike Gene is most fearful to face in his agnostic views about origins?
'Origins of life' without Intelligence - is this the conclusion of anonymous Mike Gene? If not, then what Intelligence Mr. (non-Selfish) Gene?
Arago
Comment by g arago — December 3, 2006 @ 8:43 pm