11.19.09
How the ID gang destroyed the design argument
More of Stephen Meyer’s Bad History of Science
How could the act of invoking something so foundational to the history of science as the idea of design now completely violate the rules of science itself, as I had repeatedly heard many scientists assert? If belief in intelligent design first inspired modern scientific investigation, how could mere openness to the design hypothesis now act as a “science stopper” and threaten to put an end to productive scientific research altogether, as some scientists feared?
Clearly, the idea of intelligent design had played a formative role in the foundation of modern science. Many great scientists had proposed specific design hypotheses. This seemed to suggest that intelligent design could function as a possible scientific hypothesis. But many contemporary scientists rejected this idea out of hand. Why?
I must confess that I was unable to finish Meyer’s book on ID, Signature of the Cell, which is scoring a useless success. The reason is that once you have read one ID book, others are alll the same. And they are untrustworth on subjects you wish to learn about: you must recheck everything yourself. (Darwin books are sometimes like that, also).
I am not a Darwinist, and don’t go around making fun of ID thinking. It has my respect, but the sad fact is that the current ID movement has destroyed the ancient and venerable design philosophy. Before it was cogent, but beyond demonstration, now it is larded over with a curiously deceptive presentation that hides a conservative politics and a relious obsession.
It promotes the illusion, challenge by Kant, that design is not metaphysics.
I make the same charge against natural selection abuse in Darwinism: another metaphysical research hypothesis.
That Kepler had a sene of design in nature is true, but his perspective was not at all like what the current ID folks are promoting, which was confused the challenge to Darwinism and caused many to react against all criticism, a step backward.
As to Kepler, the Discovery Institute is unworthy to even mention his name.
Darwiniana » Design argument in early modern science said,
November 20, 2009 at 3:57 pm
[...] How the ID gang destroyed the design argument [...]
reece sullivan said,
November 21, 2009 at 2:30 pm
Here’s an article I just found that articulated the possible problem of natural selection: why so many good and right mutations at just the right time? It’s also interesting b/c he tends to say that science paradigms create their religious counterparts (unwittingly.)
The false dilemma between neo-Darwinism and intelligent design:
http://www.skepticalinvestigations.org/New/Evolution/index.html