rossum
Posts: 289 Joined: Dec. 2008
|
Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Aug. 27 2013,16:46) | This is a feature IDC inherited from its intellectual lineage of deceptive creationism. (Deceptive creationism being the clade of all creationisms that rely upon calling the existing body of antievolution arguments or a subset thereof "science" for the purpose of trying to insert them into USA public school science classrooms.) Part of the argumentation is the "oppositional dualism" noted by Judge Overton in the McLean v. Arkansas case: it is asserted that either evolution or creation is true, thus anything that puts evolution in doubt counts as evidence for creation. IDC is fully on board with the oppositional dualism seen in creation science. |
Oppositional Dualism immediately puts IDC and the others outside science, since in science there is always a third option, "We don't know." Dembski's 'Explanatory Filter' fell down on this point. It always produced a definite answer by assuming a default. If there is a default, then it should be, "We don't know".
$0.02
-------------- The ultimate truth is that there is no ultimate truth.
|