I try to follow the Uncommon Descent blog, to get an idea of what is happening in the world of ID proponents. Some of the posts deserve a good laugh. The last few days have been particularly rich in the humor that they have supplied.
1: In Embryo and Einstein – Why They’re Equal, vjtorley argues against abortion. Given that the UD blog often claims that ID is a scientific program, and not a religious program, one wonders why. But then vjtorley attempts to explain that his argument is not religious, with:
The aim of this essay is to demonstrate on purely philosophical (i.e. non-religious) grounds that a human embryo is a person, who matters just as much as you or I do.
The core of his demonstration, or his argument in a nutshell (as vjtorley puts it) is this:
In brief, the essence of my argument is that a human embryo is a person, because it is a complete organism, embodying a developmental program by which it directs and controls its own development into a rational human adult, and in addition, it has already started assembling itself into a rational human adult.
You would think that if vjtorley really believed that, he would be in favor of abortion. After all, if the embryo is a complete organism and is in control, surely we should want to free it from 9 months of forced imprisonment in the uterus. Surely, it should be permitted to control its development in the free market, instead of being imprisoned in that uterine welfare state.
2: In Drat! We didn’t make the Top Ten, poster News complains that UD did not make the list of the worst anti-science web sites. Okay, I’ll grant that the posting was probably intended to be tongue in cheek. Still, it is a strange post for a site that denies that it is anti-science.
3: In All Sciences Lead to Darwinism, the Mother of Materialism, poster PaV argues that “no matter the starting point, all of science tends towards Darwinism.” According to Wikipedia, materialism dates to somewhere around 800-200 BC. Apparently, I was several thousand years off in what I thought were the dates that Darwin did his work.
4: In 48 Arguments Against Naturalism, Barry Arrington provides a link to religious arguments against naturalism. And this, in spite of the frequent claim that ID is not a religious apologetic.
5: And then in Christian Darwinism and the Evolutionary Pathway to Spirit, StephenB argues for theistic evolution, in preference to an alternative version of Christian Darwinism. And this, at a blog where other posters have indicated that they are opposed to theistic evolution. Perhaps StephenB is also against theistic evolution, but prefers it to a version of Christian Darwinism that is closer to what biologists favor.
All in all, it has been a good week for tickling the funny bone by reading at UD.