RE: [asa] C.S. Lewis on ID (Expelled?)

Gregory said:
"But there is a small group of scholars and scientists, including Christian ones, who would not wish to accept *anything* positive coming out of the IDM's presence. For these people, the sooner it/they disappear(s) from the scene, the better. Unfortunately for them, from someone who has studied social movements, this just isn't going to happen anytime soon!"

Gregory- a simple question- was the movie "Expelled" a hit or a flop? Did it meet its objectives, do you think? Or was it a last attempt at a dying thrust for the Discovery Institute's ID movement.

...Bernie

________________________________
From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On Behalf Of Gregory Arago
Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2008 10:05 AM
To: 'ASA'; Nucacids
Subject: Re: [asa] C.S. Lewis on ID

In a one sentence definition of the IDM, which will soon be published as part of a paper that is not at all about the IDM or ID otherwise, here is my definition:

"...a new movement of scholars, lawyers and public relations agents in the United States of America called the intelligent design movement, that is questioning the limits of evolutionary theory in natural sciences, asking people to consider the 'edge of evolution' and to 'explore evolution' so that it is not accepted uncritically as ideology together with science."

Of course, there is also the IDMs attempt at 'positive science' in playing by (or trying to play by) the 'rules of the game' laid down by natural scientists. In any case, the IDM certainly does fit the definition of a 'social movement' common in the field of study of social movements (there are of course other notable dimensions of this movement as well).

In sending the above pre-publication copy to an ID advocate, I was counselled that "a new movement of scientists, philosophers and other scholars" would be more appropriate. It seems there are fewer public relations persons at the Discovery Institute than most disengaged on-lookers and internet chatters would suppose.

Yes, the 'movement' still exists, Mike. And it is a (scientific) fact that many of the main figures in the IDM were educated in the mainstream of American higher education institutions (e.g. Johnson - Harvard, Chicago; Behe - Penn and Drexel; Dembski - Illinois-Chicago, Chicago, Princeton Theological; Nelson - Chicago; Meyer - Whitworth College, Cambridge; Wells - Unification Theological Seminary, Yale; Axe - California Institute of Technology; Sternberg - Florida International and Binghamton), and thus they are part of the system they are inevitably attempting to challenge.

Mike Gene might like to challenge the IDM's existence (if I correctly interpret his question, 'does it still exist?' as meaning to do this), but under pseudonym himself, with no claim to authority or educational background, while the IDM has offices, an official address and a tax number, he is in no position to 'dislocate' the meaning of 'intelligent design' away from its core in the above mentioned figures and the Discovery Institute. Indeed, what a thankless job it seems to be sometimes to have forged this significant, late-20th century road in scientific, religious and philosophical discourse, even now being pushed away by those who would have no uniquely individual theoretical idea without their initiative!

There are many things about theories/hypothesis/the paradigm of intelligent design left to be desired and even worthy of criticism, yet there are also other things that the IDM has accomplished, for example, in directly challenging the secular-materialism of the new atheists, and those versions of 'evolutionism' that are anti-theistic (i.e. one definition of 'naturalistic') or condescendingly agnostic. It seems to me that perhaps only as an 'outsider' to the conversation in America (and let's also include Britain in this assessment) is it more easily possible to see this and to speak it.

Some things brought about in the last 15+ yrs of the IDM have been regressive and some things have been progressive and I suspect many more young people will join biological sciences and study natural sciences in general as a result of the IDM's existence, promoting the teaching of good sciences. But there is a small group of scholars and scientists, including Christian ones, who would not wish to accept *anything* positive coming out of the IDM's presence. For these people, the sooner it/they disappear(s) from the scene, the better. Unfortunately for them, from someone who has studied social movements, this just isn't going to happen anytime soon!

Gregory

--- On Wed, 11/26/08, Nucacids <nucacids@wowway.com> wrote:
From: Nucacids <nucacids@wowway.com>
Subject: Re: [asa] C.S. Lewis on ID
To: "'ASA'" <asa@calvin.edu>
Received: Wednesday, November 26, 2008, 6:33 PM
Yes, ID is outside the scope of science. Of course, there are many forms of human inquiry that are not science either. As for the ID movement, does it still exist? If so, where does it exist and how does one define "the ID movement?"

- Mike
----- Original Message -----
From: Marcio Pie<mailto:pie@ufpr.br>
To: 'ASA'<mailto:asa@calvin.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2008 10:00 AM
Subject: RES: [asa] C.S. Lewis on ID

Hi David,

I think you might want to read again the quotation I provided. It seems pretty clear to me that C.S. Lewis was arguing that detecting design (the whole point of the ID) is outside the scope of science. Of course, simply pointing out that C. S. Lewis had that position is not a slam-dunk argument about the validity of the ID movement, but it provides an example of a very orthodox Christian thinker who agrees with the rest of the scientific community on this issue (even without any threat to be "expelled" from anything).

Marcio

________________________________
Looking for the perfect gift? Give the gift of Flickr!<http://www.flickr.com/gift/>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Wed Nov 26 13:15:29 2008