Saturday, November 24, 2012

I'm Really Glad Steve Fuller is on Their Side

If you are having trouble sleeping, this video of Steve Fuller prattling on and on and on while not saying very much at all is just the thing for you.

Fuller thinks that what the intelligent design movement really needs is another creationist geology book. And he thinks that Dembski is updating Shannon on information theory. (That'll be news to everyone who actually does information theory.) I'm really glad that Fuller is the intelligent design movement's favorite philosopher. Imagine the damage he could do if he were on the side of science and reason!

5 comments:

nwrickert said...

I watched that video - I must have too much spare time on my hands.

The most obvious thing of note, is that it is all about ID as a philosophy, and says almost nothing about ID as science. If the ID folk would stick to ID as philosophy, we would not be having nearly as many disagreements.

But then he gets into a long winded discussion of theodicy. He suggests that theodicy is really why people prefer evolution over ID. For someone who pretends to be a philosopher of science, he has a serious misunderstanding of what motivates scientists.

By the time I have finished his long waffling argument about the relation between ID and theodicy, I had trouble deciding whether what Fuller said should count as an argument for ID or an argument against ID.

I guess that I did at least learn something about the way that Steve Fuller thinks.

John Pieret said...

What real philosophers think about Fuller:

http://leiterreports.typepad.com/blog/2012/11/steve-fuller-makes-things-up.html

John Stockwell said...

Re: Dembski

So, how is the "Newton of information theory" doing these days? I haven't heard much about him lately?

Anonymous said...

Um, um, uh he does not come across as an intellectual flyweight let alone heavyweight.

Fullerofit said...

John Pieret, can you list more real philosophers who feel the same way? If not, can you not use the plural? While you're at it, you can define "real".