Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed

[cmt2779]

According to Ben Stein, "Evil can sometimes be rationalized as science." Expelled reveals the ways that evil can be rationalized and disguised as argument and intellectual inquiry, too. That may seem extreme, but the ideas presented, the sorts of sloppy arguments made, and the twisted rhetoric used in this movie are dangerous and have the

Comments

[anonymous]

He says, "Darwinism does lead to atheism" and he says this despite the film's immediately preceding insistence upon the happy coexistence of scientific inquiry and religion throughout history.

Actually there's been nothing but constant conflict between science and religion for centuries, and this conflict is now worse than ever. For example America is infested with idiots like Ben Stein who prefer magical creation myths like intelligent design instead of science.

Can a strong understanding of evolutionary biology lead to throwing out magic god fairies? Probably yes because why should anyone believe in a god who wasn't ever needed for anything? I think one of the reasons Darwin was the greatest man in human history is because he killed the god invention.

So the lying idiot Ben Stein actually said something correctly when he said "Darwinism does lead to atheism", but of course that brain-dead moron calls it darwinism instead of evolution as if there's been no scientific progress the past 150 years.

[cmt2779]

1. Who is this?

2. Both you and Ben Stein have incomplete ideas about the relationship between science and religion over the course of history. They did not simply happily coexist (some scientific inquiry was stifled and some scientists punished, even killed, if it didn't agree with the Church's teachings), but neither was there "nothing but constant conflict between science and religion." Many major scientific thinkers were themselves religious. Most of the conflict arose, as far as I can tell, between the organizations of religion and certain elements of science, not between religious belief itself as a private matter and the practice of science.

3. "Darwinism does lead to atheism" is simply incorrect. Stein interviews Richard Dawkins, who says that for him an understanding of evolutionary biology led to atheism. He is a good example of how it can lead to atheism. Perhaps it even should lead to atheism. I am not opposed to that argument. But it is a logical fallacy to say that it does lead to atheism. There is not a

[clevermanka]

What...what happened to Ben Stein? I mean, seriously, really, honestly--what happened? Was he always batshit crazy but nobody noticed because he was still funny?

[cmt2779]

That is an excellent question. I would speculate that the elements of batshit craziness were probably always there, waiting for the right moment to spring forth. But that's just speculation on my part, based on my unwillingness to believe that someone could turn so crazy so fast.

2 cents

[mattbeasley]

I have not seen Expelled, but I did read Ebert's take on it along with many of the responses (his blogs are some of the best I've ever come across). What struck me as odd while reading his review, and what was voiced loudly in the responses to it, were the parallels between Stein's Expelled and Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11. Both are shameless propaganda peices marketed as documentaries. Yet, all of the tactics in Expelled used for manipulative purposes were denigrated by Ebert yet, in his review of Fahrenheit 9/11, he calls the same tactics help "make a good movie better." I wonder if there will ever be a category simply called 'propaganda.' I fear the soiling of 'documentary' will never be purged.

Re: 2 cents

[cmt2779]

You know, I did think about Fahrenheit 9/11 a couple of times while watching Expelled because I recognized some of the same basic techniques in both films. I'd have to see Fahrenheit 9/11 again to comment on this with more certitude, but I felt that while Moore's film is not a true documentary but, as Roger Ebert calls it, an op-ed piece, Stein's is ultimately nothing more than propaganda. While Moore definitely makes an argument, I felt like he did a good job of stepping out of the frame and letting the images and individuals speak for themselves on key points. I didn't feel like Stein ever really allowed that to happen in Expelled.

I can't deny, of course, that I am more inclined to like Fahrenheit 9/11 because I already agree with many of Moore's basic premises (though I did have some problems with the way he presents some ideas) and that I am more inclined to disagree with Expelled because I disagree with Stein's basic premises. But I don't think my bias is so strong as to completely blind me to the truth and the rhetoric

Re: 2 cents...+ ramblings on

[mattbeasley]

The problem is that propaganda has a negative connotation. If a film came out promoting youth abstinence, those holding opposing view points would label it propaganda just as a film coming out promoting safe sex would be labeled 'propaganda' by others

Re: 2 cents...+ ramblings on

[cmt2779]

Dude, mine, too.

I feel like there are some things I'd like to say in response to this, but what they are isn't clear yet. I may come back to this later.