Re: Claim: ID would have prevented recent discovery
- From: j.wilkins1@xxxxxxxxx (John Wilkins)
- Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2008 19:22:10 +1000
Ritsjoena <bramvandam@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Apr 27, 1:48 am, "Perplexed in Peoria" <jimmene...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
"Glend" <interelectromagne...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote
This review tackles the central claims of "Expelled" that science
represses ID, bringing up the science of chirality:
"Schmidt disagreed, pointing to recent research into the left- and
right-handed orientation of amino acids, which has revolutionized
chemistry, he said. That discovery could never have been made with
intelligent design as a basis, he said, and proving intelligent design
in the first place would be impossible.
Anyone have a clue as to what recent research Schmidt is talking
about? It must be well known since it has revolutionized chemistry. ;-)
I had not seen it before too, my mind went to some other research. But
reading the link provided by glend told me that it is basically about
a source for the initial imbalance between left and right-handed
orientation of amino acids.
Also, I am curious as to why Schmidt thinks that a belief in ID
could have prevented a revolutionary discovery in chemistry.
Because if you say god did it you already have an answer and don't
need to find another. I agree that this does not necessarily lead to a
stop of scientific research (it can be a mental barrier), we could say
we can research the creation of this god and his reasons.
However, ID (or creationism) is combined with some more rules than god
did it: you can't know the will of god. God is so far above us that we
can't hope to understand how he did it etc etc. Basically: don't waste
your time because you can never understand it.
Which is the argument presented by the following authors:
Wilkins, John S., and Wesley R. Elsberry. 2001. The advantages of theft
over toil: the design inference and arguing from ignorance. Biology and
Philosophy 16 (November): 711-724.
--
John S. Wilkins, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Philosophy
University of Queensland - Blog: scienceblogs.com/evolvingthoughts
"He used... sarcasm. He knew all the tricks, dramatic irony, metaphor,
bathos, puns, parody, litotes and... satire. He was vicious."
.
- References:
- Claim: ID would have prevented recent discovery
- From: Glend
- Re: Claim: ID would have prevented recent discovery
- From: Perplexed in Peoria
- Re: Claim: ID would have prevented recent discovery
- From: Ritsjoena
- Claim: ID would have prevented recent discovery
- Prev by Date: Re: intemediate species
- Next by Date: Re: Evolution is not a fact
- Previous by thread: Re: Claim: ID would have prevented recent discovery
- Next by thread: Re: Claim: ID would have prevented recent discovery
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
