I stumbled upon Creationism and Its Critics in Antiquity at the bookstore. I don't have time to read it right now, but I thought I'd point to it since I'm sure some readers would be interested. Accuse me of being excessively Whiggish if you must, but it just reiterates that Creationism doesn't belong in a science class; the basic disputes are a rehash of philosophical & religious clashes which are timeless, or at least date from the rise of philosophy in the ancient world. Creationism is ahistorical; I believe it is rooted in psychological intuitions about ontology which rebel against systematic critiques which undermines naive perceptions of How the World Works.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
I happen to personally accept both of these assertions:
1) A scientific world-view entails atheism
2) A scientific world-view contradictions Creationism
That being said, as matters of debate & discussion I think the former is an open question, while the latter is not an open question. When it…
In a response to my defense of Freud, Jonah Lehrer states that, with Harold Bloom (ewww!), he sees Freud as "one of the great artists of the 20th century." In my view, how we read Freud today -- as literature, philosophy, or science -- is largely a matter of choice, as is the case for most early…
As I hear people debate about evolution and religion, I feel like I'm listening to a political debate between two middle schoolers. One says that you have to vote republican because taxes are bad and the other says no, democrats are right because the republican kid has cooties. No one seems to…
Well, that got your attention, didn't it? Actually, I'm referring to a post by PZ where he discusses his objections to religion. In reading them, they really didn't seem to describe my religion, so I thought it would be interesting to go through them.
For background, I guess I'm a…