The Big Shebang.
The problem with the conversation between IDers and evolutionistas is a large rift in mental perspectives. While religiously motivated people think of things almost exlusively within a right-wrong paradigm, scientists forsake that simple model for another one entirely: the more right-less right paradigm.
Back when we thought our Earth was the center of it all, science came along and gave us a "more right" model. Scientifically motivated people need to completely forsake the words of "right" and "wrong", and speak only in terms of "more right" and "less right". Us arm-chair scientists need to stop saying "we're right and here's why". We need only respond with "This model is more right. I don't know if it is actually fully right." And that is all.
From that point on, there is no more discussion with people who reject that fundamental perspective.
In fact, the end result of a religious "right-wrong" model of thought is a God who is always catching up with, and adaptiong to, scientific advances. The explanations of religion never become "more right", they simply change arbitrarily along the same exact lines it has previously used.
The presented unanimity of the ID crowd is their downfall. The scientific community has thousands of theories and models, and that says nothing to the strengths of ID. About the only true debate within the ID community is the fierce battle between those who advocate a top-opening banana method, and those who advocate a bottom-opening banana method.
Bonus: Ekpyrotic Universe. This is an interesting piece on a theory whose philosophical great-great-great grandfather is Stoicism. Interesting stuff, and a beautiful demonstration of my point.
Back when we thought our Earth was the center of it all, science came along and gave us a "more right" model. Scientifically motivated people need to completely forsake the words of "right" and "wrong", and speak only in terms of "more right" and "less right". Us arm-chair scientists need to stop saying "we're right and here's why". We need only respond with "This model is more right. I don't know if it is actually fully right." And that is all.
From that point on, there is no more discussion with people who reject that fundamental perspective.
In fact, the end result of a religious "right-wrong" model of thought is a God who is always catching up with, and adaptiong to, scientific advances. The explanations of religion never become "more right", they simply change arbitrarily along the same exact lines it has previously used.
The presented unanimity of the ID crowd is their downfall. The scientific community has thousands of theories and models, and that says nothing to the strengths of ID. About the only true debate within the ID community is the fierce battle between those who advocate a top-opening banana method, and those who advocate a bottom-opening banana method.
Bonus: Ekpyrotic Universe. This is an interesting piece on a theory whose philosophical great-great-great grandfather is Stoicism. Interesting stuff, and a beautiful demonstration of my point.