Re: The Reasonable Minority

On Dec 25, 7:05 pm, er...@xxxxxxxx wrote:
On Dec 12, 7:34 pm, Evopeach <keaton1...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:





On Dec 12, 7:19 pm, Rupert Morrish <rup...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Evopeach wrote:
On Dec 12, 12:42 pm, Rusty Sites <SpameYou...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Evopeach wrote:
On Dec 11, 1:19 am, Rusty Sites <SpameYou...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Evopeach wrote:
On Dec 10, 5:48 pm, John Harshman <jharshman.diespam...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Evopeach wrote:
This week I read two books which I found both enlightening and well
reasoned. The first was "The Language of God" by Francis Collins and
"The Design Revolution" by William Demski.
While Collins accepts evolution and an old earth he is also an
evangelical christian and a consumate scientist educated in physics,
chemistry, biology, and medicine. He has little respect for people
like Dawkins.
Really? Does he actually say that? I can see how he might not like
Dawkins' theology, but how could he not respect Dawkins' scientific work?
What scientific work? Dawkins is a pop science writer , parttime
instructor, and has little published current research.
Demski likewise has significant credentials in math, philosophy,
information theory and yes theology.
So? And what are his significant credentials in information theory, exactly?
He returned to school at the University of Illinois at Chicago (UIC),
where he studied psychology (in which he received a B.A. in 1981) and
statistics (receiving an M.S. in 1983). He was awarded an S.M. in
mathematics in 1985, and a Ph.D., also in mathematics, in 1988, both
from the University of Chicago, after which he held a postdoctoral
fellowship in mathematics from the National Science Foundation from
1988 until 1991, and another in the history and philosophy of science
at Northwestern University from 1992-1993. He was awarded an M.A. in
philosophy in 1993, and a Ph.D. in the same subject in 1996, both from
UIC, and an M.Div from Princeton Theological Seminary, also in 1996
These two men are not in agreement intotality but certainly have
respect, honesty, sincerity and good scholarship on their side, as
well as being fine wrtiters and presenters.
I doubt that. Who respects Dembski? Who claims he is honest, sincere,
and/or scholarly? Does Collins have an expressed opinion on Dembski?
Ph.D. philosophy University of Illinois at Chicago 1996
M.Div. theology Princeton Theological Seminary 1996
M.A. philosophy University of Illinois at Chicago 1993
Ph.D. mathematics University of Chicago 1988
S.M. mathematics University of Chicago 1985
M.S. statistics University of Illinois at Chicago 1983
B.A. psychology University of Illinois at Chicago 1981
http://www.designinference.com/documents/PDF_Current_CV_Dembski.pdf
A review of such credentials and his vitae leaves one with a choice of
disrespecting those in the academic community at major institutions,
publishing house editorial review boards, and peers or agreeing to
cease unthoughtful personal attacks based on no evidence.
Apparently you, like Dembski, consider criticism of his supposedly
scientific work a personal attack.
Dr. Collins was kind enough to email a very civil and warm response to
me concerning certain questions I have regarding his positions.
What did he say?
I am hardly going to share personal correspondence with you.
As a formal student in the History of Science and associated
discliplines of philosophy, critial thinking and such I am chagrined
that people ignore the history of the last 500 years in which religion
and science were quite well behaved one toward the other in majority,
great thinkers and practioners were integrated in both endeavors and
quite accomplished in both.
Are you really a formal student in the history of science? I would
interpret that to mean that you're enrolled in a degree program
somewhere. Mind saying where?
A  Masters in Liberal Studies with an emphasis in The History of
Science at the University of Oklahoma.
The poles apart, cynical, rabid, outliers which dominate public debate
presently are quite the opposite and not in the strict tradition of
open inquiry, critical thinking, rational debate and mutual respect
that history presents.
I wonder whether Collins would consider Dembski as one of the rapid
outliers. Do you have any evidence on that?
No, but as a fellow believer I would certainly doubt Collins would
agree with your characterization od Dembski.
Ah, after all the formalities about credentials, we finally get to the
real issue.  You would expect Collins to endorse Dembski's scientific
work based on your common religious beliefs.- Hide quoted text -
No you commit the usual logical fallacies of red herring, false
attribution and mischaracterization of statements.
I did that all in two short sentences?

I simply stated

that Collins would not be one who resorts to ad hominems, crude
language, logical fallacies and cheapshot cynical remarks as evidenced
here.
Here is your actual statement from above.

"No, but as a fellow believer I would certainly doubt Collins would
agree with your characterization od Dembski."

Here is the statement it was in response to.

"I wonder whether Collins would consider Dembski as one of the rapid
outliers. Do you have any evidence on that?"

And this you claim is this was somehow "ad hominems, crude
language, logical fallacies and cheapshot cynical remarks"?

And then you have the unmitigated gall to accuse me of mis
characterization of statements?

The scholastic achievments, books, publications and work product of
Dembski would not be subject to hipshooter remarks and silly
assertions based on nothing material in presentation
So basically you don't have any idea what Collins thinks about Dembski's
work.  Do you think all criticism of Dembski is just "hipshooter remarks
and silly assertions based on nothing material in presentation"?

NOt all just the unreasoned hyperbole on this post.

  Do you
have any idea what knowledgeable people have had to say about Dembski's
arguments?  As far as that goes, do you even know what Dembski's
arguments are?

I have read two of his books and listened to a one hour lecture
personally. That is not all inclusive as his body of work is quite
extensive.
.....Collins is an

honest man
And you are sure that any honest person would accept what Dembski says?

Your definition of honesty would be quite interesting I'm
sure....basically anyone who disagrees with Dembski.

I can't speak for Rusty, but I would go with something like "does not
make statements he knows to be untrue".

Many honest people agree with Dembski because they do not know better. I
am sure there are some dishonest people who disagree with him, simply
because they are competent in either maths or biology does not make them
  honest. However, with no exceptions that I am aware of, honest people
with expertise in the fields in which Dembski writes disagree with him.

with an ethic of respect and decorum in addition to his

considerable skills.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

-----------------www.Newsgroup-Binaries.com-*Completion*Retention*Speed*
Access your favorite newsgroups from home or on the road
------------------ Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I can think of no exception that people who agree that Dembski is
legitimate and qualified are not by definition ruled unqualified,
pseudo-scientists, dishonest, and enemies of true science. The litmus
test for being affimed by your comunity is that they disagree with
Dembski and dispise him personally.

Like Anthony Flew, once the darling of the scientific community,

Really? I never heard of him.

who
became an outcast and befuddled old man once he gave credence to ID
and expressed reservation as to the completeness of evolutionary
theory.

Isn't it more likely that he became a befuddled old man and _then_gave
credence to ID?

This is repeated ad finitum in America and elsewhere.

For instance, why are _you_ a science hater?  What argument can you
make that that is what Jesus desires of you?

Eric Root- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

How does not accepting the tired dogma of a failing theory make me a
science hater when I have studied many of the discliplines, read
extensively, worked in directly and indirectly related fields,
continue to study the history of science as a retiree. What I dislike
is censorship, dogma, ridicule, and dishonestly directed at people
simply because they have alternative ideas, compete for the minds of
the broad community, and have a world view that is abhorrent to yours.

I want science to succeed in its endeavors (well maybe we could stop
throwing money down the rathole of abiogenesis research) even under
the evo paradigm. But this country can afford to let alternative adeas
germinate, new concepts mature, compete in the marketplace of ideas.
We'll figure out what works, makes sense, is contributory without the
abuse, attacks, cynicism, censorship just fine. Americans are a lot
smarter than the elitists think.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: The Reasonable Minority
    ... While Collins accepts evolution and an old earth he is also an ... Dawkins is a pop science writer, ... He returned to school at the University of Illinois at Chicago, ... Does Collins have an expressed opinion on Dembski? ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: The Reasonable Minority
    ... While Collins accepts evolution and an old earth he is also an ... Dawkins is a pop science writer, ... He returned to school at the University of Illinois at Chicago, ... Does Collins have an expressed opinion on Dembski? ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: The Reasonable Minority
    ... I will agree that his direct contributions to science ended about 20 ... He returned to school at the University of Illinois at Chicago, ... Does Collins have an expressed opinion on Dembski? ... Generally by openminded inquiry, thoughtful reasoning, investigation ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: The Reasonable Minority
    ... While Collins accepts evolution and an old earth he is also an ... Dawkins is a pop science writer, ... He returned to school at the University of Illinois at Chicago, ... Does Collins have an expressed opinion on Dembski? ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: The Reasonable Minority
    ... While Collins accepts evolution and an old earth he is also an ... He returned to school at the University of Illinois at Chicago, ... Does Collins have an expressed opinion on Dembski? ... And you are sure that any honest person would accept what Dembski says? ...
    (talk.origins)