ID as a Cultural Phenomenon (Humans)

by xeno6696 , Sonoran Desert, Sunday, September 20, 2009, 20:12 (5334 days ago) @ David Turell

David,-Is it safe then to say we agree that ID is inextricably linked to a specific philosophical framework?-This ties into my greater general skepticism on ID (as a movement). The authors I'm most familiar with propose arguments that they claim are scientific, when in fact they are philosophical interpretations of scientific evidence. These are drastically different activities. Science is about examining the natural world and coming up with explanations suited to the evidence; while on the surface that is what it seems the DI wants to do, the conclusion they reach is itself unscientific. While you might not accept Popper's view that scientific claim must be falsifiable, science simply cannot work if it drops that tenet--nor can it reasonably operate without reductionism; which limits its scope--but that's the entire point of science in the first place: limit the outside variables. The wider the scope, the more unmanageable the data is; hence why "all generalizations are false, including this one." (Twain.) -That is why science itself is operationally agnostic, and though dhw has pointed out that human passions sometimes get in the way; in the grand scheme of things wrong is always removed from the machine. -Part of my intrinsic hatred (yeah, its that strong) of the DI is that the wording of their statements often is worded in such a fashion that it is reporting "scientific results" when in fact it is simply informed opinion. This is misinformation and a disservice to the general public. Most people don't know the differences between philosophy and science, and the DI takes advantage of this by often speaking either from authority or like Dembski, using highly complex equivocations in order to convince the reader that "I'm smarter than you, so trust me." -If you watch how the DI operates it is often more like the church of scientology; especially in the way it handles its opponents. Massimo Pigliucci discussed about a colleague who had his website pulled due to criticism of ID; the content dealt only with Behe's mousetrap argument and the DI claimed libel against the ISP. The ISP pulled the site afraid of a lawsuit until he could move the site to the USA (where content laws absolve ISP's from all libel claims.) For specifics I'd refer you to "Denying Evolution," where Pigliucci goes at length to talk about some of the underhandedness of the DI. -Organizations willing to operate like PETA earn from me nothing but contempt. So I do implore you; Behe might not seem like a snake but being a fellow of this organization is a dubious position.

--
\"Why is it, Master, that ascetics fight with ascetics?\"

\"It is, brahmin, because of attachment to views, adherence to views, fixation on views, addiction to views, obsession with views, holding firmly to views that ascetics fight with ascetics.\"