tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post8837501468428269867..comments2023-12-21T06:35:36.624-05:00Comments on Recursivity: I'm Really Glad Steve Fuller is on Their SideUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-90000366539334170902012-12-06T22:00:55.222-05:002012-12-06T22:00:55.222-05:00John Pieret, can you list more real philosophers w...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".Fullerofitnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-65018394516727044472012-11-30T20:37:17.852-05:002012-11-30T20:37:17.852-05:00Um, um, uh he does not come across as an intellect...Um, um, uh he does not come across as an intellectual flyweight let alone heavyweight.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-74663426314393669542012-11-27T12:08:11.425-05:002012-11-27T12:08:11.425-05:00Re: Dembski
So, how is the "Newton of inform...Re: Dembski<br /><br />So, how is the "Newton of information theory" doing these days? I haven't heard much about him lately?John Stockwellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03496308585336775569noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-59977587221229199482012-11-24T17:48:52.307-05:002012-11-24T17:48:52.307-05:00What real philosophers think about Fuller:
http:/...What <i>real</i> philosophers think about Fuller:<br /><br />http://leiterreports.typepad.com/blog/2012/11/steve-fuller-makes-things-up.htmlJohn Pierethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17336244849636477317noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-57527741852702503622012-11-24T14:50:49.523-05:002012-11-24T14:50:49.523-05:00I watched that video - I must have too much spare ...I watched that video - I must have too much spare time on my hands.<br /><br />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.<br /><br />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.<br /><br />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.<br /><br />I guess that I did at least learn something about the way that Steve Fuller thinks.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com