True2Ourselves
Already a member? login
Divider
Divider
Divider
Divider
Divider
Divider
Divider
Divider
Divider
Divider
Divider
Divider
  
+
Register FAQ A-Z directory Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

True2Ourselves Forums   > Community Topics > Christianity & Science  > Atheists for Intelligent Design

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 03-28-2012, 01:45 PM
Linsinbigler's Avatar
Representative Clergy
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 5,150
Default Atheists for Intelligent Design

Saturday, November 22, 2008

Atheists for Intelligent Design?

I recently listened to some interesting podcasts (see links below) in which an atheist philosopher of physics, Bradley Monton, shared that he thinks the basic arguments for Intelligent Design are sound from a scientific and philosophical standpoint and should be given more weight than they are. Intelligent Design is the theory that many features of the universe can only be explained as a result of the activity of an intelligent agent rather than as the product of non-intelligent forces and laws of nature. This includes many features of biological systems, which naturalists insist can be adequately explained by random mutation and natural selection working together.

Many critics of Intelligent Design view it as an attempt to sneak religion into the classroom and skirt the establishment clause of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. ...


Read more here...


The Missionary Journey: Atheists for Intelligent Design?
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 03-28-2012, 01:47 PM
Linsinbigler's Avatar
Representative Clergy
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 5,150
Default Re: Atheists for Intelligent Design

Here is more recent article on it:

Rod Dreher Atheists for Intelligent Design?
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 03-28-2012, 02:00 PM
Linsinbigler's Avatar
Representative Clergy
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 5,150
Default Re: Atheists for Intelligent Design

Other interesting article:

Atheists, are you still arguing about intelligent design? - Yahoo! Answers
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 03-28-2012, 05:31 PM
Suspended for Review
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 3,359
Default Re: Atheists for Intelligent Design

The first two posts are both about Monton and his book, which I gather is about the philosophy of science and (I think) an attempt to get the matter of ID treated – and discounted if necessary (which it appears he mostly does) from a scientific viewpoint as opposed to denying it simply because people view it as being religiously based (the third post is a Yahoo question which I’ll ignore).

That’s a reasonable stand from a philosophical viewpoint and it’s worth making the point. Which is to treat all claims on their merit.

Unfortunately his book is not available on Kindle and I’m not keen to wait a couple of weeks to read it. Hopefully I’ll get an understanding of his position from his blogs and podcasts which I’ll check out tonight.

Before I do that, it might be worth stating just what ID claims. This is most definitely not about whether God created the Universe. ID claims that (quoting from The Design Institute’s testimony in the Dover case and their book ‘Pandas Thumb’):

"Intelligent design means that various forms of life began abruptly through an intelligent agency with their distinctive features already intact. Fish with fins and scales, birds with feathers, beaks, and wings, etc."

Linsinbigler, I’m not sure how I can read your posts other than being in support of ID. Or perhaps you are taking Monton’s view a step further and perhaps suggesting that the argument has deteriorated into the ‘Godless’ v ‘The Faithfull’ and a win for evolution is a loss for, in your case, Christianity.

I’ve never subscribed to that. I don’t even think that a ‘win’ for evolution is a ‘loss’ for ID. There isn’t even a contest – and I don’t meant that in the sense that ID is so far behind on points then there can only be one winner.

There are obviously short-hand arguments being thrown around that skip the scientific basis for ID and go straight to the claim that it is religiously based. But if the very proponents of ID admit that themselves, then it’s not too unreasonable to point that out as well.

The science is in. But evolution is not a ‘way of life’. It shouldn’t be put forward as a ‘world view’ with someone with an agenda to push onto students as Mark was earlier complaining about. It’s just science. It’s the best explanation for why things appear as they do. And that could include Deistic evolution as well. We’re not talking about abiogenesis or why we are here. It’s just a matter of the process by which we reached this point.

I’m pretty certain from what you’ve previously written that you don’t believe in ID as it is described by the people who propose it. Can you confirm that?
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 03-29-2012, 09:33 PM
Suspended for Review
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 3,359
Default Re: Atheists for Intelligent Design

I’ve read quite a bit of what Morton has written in relation to ID specifically as it relates to the Dover Trial. The trial pretty much condensed all the pros and conns for and against ID and enabled the best arguments to be put forward in a fair and reasonable way.

Morton has written a paper on it (http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/2583...turalism_2.pdf) and it makes for interesting reading. He suggests that the judge in this case rejected the ID case purely on the basis of it being a religious based proposal, the fact that it is not scientific and that the Intelligent Design had been refuted by the scientific community.

Notwithstanding that Behe and other ID-ers admit to looking for answers to a question on which they have already decided, his arguments stand up to a certain degree.

There is no doubt that Behe, for example, is undoubtedly conducting science when he offers examples of irreducible complexity. That the science is wrong, as Morton readily admits, does not preclude it from being science. I can’t see any arguments against that. Behe is not simply standing on street corners with a placard that says that the world is about to end. He does the hard yards in trying to prove his point and as I’ve said before, you would really have to be an expert in the fields of biology and mathematics to name just two, to be able to follow the debate, let alone come to a definitive view about it.

To counter the (obvious) point that science that is wrong can hardly be supported, Morton uses Newtonian physics as an example. New theories have supersede Newtonian ones but Newtonian physics is still taught in schools. But I don’t think he’s got much to argue with here, as Newtonian physics isn’t ‘wrong’, it’s just not accurate enough to be used in certain circumstances. Same as Euclidian geometry. It’s not wrong either, but it can’t be used in certain circumstances.

Behe, however, is (and again, as Morton admits), wrong in this particular case. Morton is actually saying that ID uses bad science but it’s science nevertheless. Well, OK. I’ll go with that.

He then moves on to methodological naturalism and the fact that he is also a philosopher of religion as well as science I think allows him to stretch his arguments too far. He suggests that a supernatural explanation could be a valid reason for scientific observations. He literally suggests that evidence for God could be forthcoming – and we’re not talking about weeping statues or dancing suns here. Ipso facto, supernatural events could be explained by science, therefore supernatural events are scientific. QED.

The problem with this is that the supernatural event that is causing whatever it is you are observing is open to any, and I mean any, interpretation. Rather than saying – ‘actually, we don’t know the reason at this point in time, but we’re working on it’ – Morton is suggesting that we fill in the gaps of our knowledge with ‘possible’ supernatural causes.

If that were the case, then any gap in knowledge could be filled likewise. But what are you actually doing? I’d say you’re putting a placeholder in the literature: Possible Supernatural Event – to be confirmed.

Where does that get you? Maybe it helps Morton sleep better at night knowing that he’s being as fair as he possibly can, but it doesn’t advance the ID cause any amount at all. He’s not really defending ID. He’s defending a very narrow view of epistemology.

Quite interesting, nevertheless.

Last edited by Brad : 03-29-2012 at 09:36 PM.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 04-01-2012, 05:04 AM
Suspended for Review
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,673
Default Re: Atheists for Intelligent Design

Quote:
Originally Posted by Linsinbigler View Post
Intelligent Design is the theory that many features of the universe can only be explained as a result of the activity of an intelligent agent rather than as the product of non-intelligent forces and laws of nature.
When ID makes its way into America's schools, how many of its supporters will entertain the suggestion that the "intelligent agent" is anything other than the Christian God?
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 04-01-2012, 09:26 AM
CatholicCrusader's Avatar
Knight of the Forum
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 9,258
Default Re: Atheists for Intelligent Design

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gray View Post
When ID makes its way into America's schools, how many of its supporters will entertain the suggestion that the "intelligent agent" is anything other than the Christian God?
How about the Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Bhuddists. just to name a few
__________________

"God in his deepest mystery is not a solitude but a family, since he has in himself fatherhood, sonship and the essence of the family which is love"
- Saint Pope John Paul II
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 04-01-2012, 01:30 PM
Soulheart3's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 5,005
Default Re: Atheists for Intelligent Design

Quote:
Originally Posted by CatholicCrusader View Post
How about the Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Bhuddists. just to name a few

I think he is saying that we will be predudicial only wanting to share the christian view of creation. Thats just him being himself, cynical. He tends to view christians with a skewered bad view. But there would be many who would only want the christian view shared as this is prodominantly christian nation.
__________________
Knowledge and Wisdom are both good and worth finding, but they also have truly bad downsides, just study the life of Solomon to see the truth of this. Love does not puff up. Perfect Love drives out pride. Faith, Hope, and Love are the greatest of all things we can strive for, and the greatest of these are Love. Proverbs 3:5-6 Trust in the Lord with ALL your heart and lean NOT on your own understanding. In all your ways aknowledge Him and He shall direct your paths.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 04-01-2012, 04:51 PM
Suspended for Review
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,673
Default Re: Atheists for Intelligent Design

Quote:
Originally Posted by CatholicCrusader View Post
How about the Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Bhuddists. just to name a few
How many of them are part of the ID movement?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulheart3 View Post

I think he is saying that we will be predudicial only wanting to share the christian view of creation. Thats just him being himself, cynical. He tends to view christians with a skewered bad view. But there would be many who would only want the christian view shared as this is prodominantly christian nation.
But ID is not put forward as a Christian idea - it's a scientific idea, isn't it? The next logical step is to try to find out who that "intelligent agent" is. I'd be very surprised if any of ID's proponents don't already have the answer to that question.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 04-01-2012, 05:21 PM
Suspended for Review
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 3,359
Default Re: Atheists for Intelligent Design

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gray View Post
How many of them are part of the ID movement?
Yeah, I think that all the proponents of ID are Christian. Maybe the Discovery Institute might be able to counter your thinly veiled accusations, Gray, if they had some Muslim or Hindu members.

But imagine this scenario: Behe or one of his chums finally comes up with a zinger of an argument and then everyone else claims it as being their Intelligent Designer.

Where to from there?
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
10 Questions That Every Intelligent Christian Must Answer Mark General Discussions 15 09-10-2011 06:37 PM
Hey Atheists! Waymarker General Discussions 14 10-08-2009 11:55 PM
God's design for the sexual union Carico Sexual Morality 23 09-25-2009 10:44 AM
New Home Page Design Mark General Discussions 27 09-14-2009 02:28 PM
Building intelligent unity. Heneni Culture & Recreation 7 04-05-2009 10:35 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:58 PM.


true2ourselves
 
 
 

Flashcoms

You need to upgrade your Flash Player.

Version 8 or higher is required.

download from http://www.adobe.com/go/getflashplayer

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29