Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id BAA09269 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Fri, 2 Jun 2000 01:34:25 +0100 Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2000 10:31:51 +1000 From: John Wilkins <wilkins@wehi.EDU.AU> Subject: Re: Fwd: [COMPLEX-M] "Intelligent Design" lobby Congress against Darwinism To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0006012230310.27820-100000@kite.syrinx.com.au> Message-ID: <MailDrop1.2d7j-PPC.1000602103151@mac463.wehi.edu.au> X-Authenticated: <wilkins@wehiz.wehi.edu.au> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
On Thu, 1 Jun 2000 22:32:57 +1000 (EST) chris@syrinx.com.au (Dr
ChRISTOPhER CLEiRIGh) wrote:
>On Thu, 1 Jun 2000 I.Price@shu.ac.uk wrote:
>
>> Complexity is being invoked at a Congressional hearing to discredit
>Darwinism.
>
>Gee, and I thought Darwinian systems were one specitic type of complex
>system! Silly me!
>
The Intelligent Design people are a sophisticated form of Paleyesque
creationist. They are attempting to have Darwinian thinking removed not
only from the American (and by extension other countries') education
systems, but also to remove funding for projects that assume Darwinian
principles. This is the reason why they are taking a political approach
- they call it the "Wedge strategy", to edge Darwinian theory out of
scientific discourse.
To this end they egregiously misconstrue Darwinian thinking. Dembski has
argued that genetic algorithms cannot search large spaces (in defiance
of all experience), and that selection cannot generate "information"
(which is some sort of mystical property not exhibited by things that do
evolve darwinianly).
Behe denies that evolution can generate "irreducibly complex" systems
for which the modification or removal of any component would make it
non-functional, as if duplication and function shifts were unheard of.
Phillip Johnson accuses scientists of the sin of "naturalism" (which,
unlike the naturalistic fallacy in ethics, is the "fallacy" of assuming
that all that exists is natural, when in fact what naturalism science
exhibits is epistemological - it's been pointed out to him, and yet he
repeats it). All are motivated by theology, and all have no interest in
science except insofar as it serves that theology.
To my mind this represents both an interesting social movement that is
itself memetic - the reinvasion of a modified form of concept into an
ecology (science) that had previously selected against it - and also a
major challenge to the advances since Darwin. If they have their way,
science will be prohibited by fiat from investigating certain things
that offend theological presuppositions.
--John Wilkins, Head, Graphic Production The Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research Melbourne, Australia <mailto:wilkins@WEHI.EDU.AU> <http://www.users.bigpond.com/thewilkins/darwiniana.html> Homo homini aut deus aut lupus - Erasmus of Rotterdam
=============================================================== This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing) see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 02 2000 - 01:35:02 BST