More Thomas Nagel (The limitations of science)

by David Turell , Saturday, May 11, 2013, 16:15 (3996 days ago) @ David Turell

Evenhanded review of Nagel:-http://tbsblog.thebestschools.org/2013/05/11/reviewer-on-thomas-nagels-mind-cosmos-a-flawed-thesis-but-still-a-valuable-contribution/#more-13337-The editorial comment for religiosity at the end is not intended by me as important.-"Apparently Dr. Nagel, wants to have his cake and eat it too. Read, for example, this sentence: "Those who have seriously criticized these arguments have certainly shown that there are ways to resist the design conclusion; but the general force of the negative part of the intelligent design position—skepticism about the likelihood of the orthodox reductive view, given the available evidence—does not appear to me to have been destroyed in these exchanges."
 
"Hard to track ?
 
"Definitely. And that's because "seriously criticized" and "certainly shown" are pumped up phrases which go flat when followed by swarming, confusing negatives like "negative part... skepticism of the likelihood... does not appear... to have been destroyed..."
 
"While we do get the point that the design argument deserves consideration, the gummy syntax of this sentence is representative of the style of much of the book.
 
"Nagel follows up this sentence with the limp observation, "At least, the question should be regarded as open." But, really, are there any worthwhile questions that are not open?"