In the News

Jonathan Dudley, a student at the Divinity School and a molecular oncology researcher at Yale School of Medicine, writes a commentary in the Yale Daily News.

Dudley writes, "Few scientists or philosophers from respectable academic institutions have given serious consideration to ID." But, apparently, many from academic institutions which are not respected have seriously considered ID?

He further states, "Modern science is characterized by what philosophers call 'methodological naturalism' - the pragmatic assumption that every physical phenomenon has a natural, versus a supernatural, explanation." The key word is philosphers. Methodological naturalism is a science philosophy, not what drives the vast amount of empirical research.

Dudley calls ID "pseudo-science". He adds, "Since ID invokes a supernatural being to explain the formation of 'irreducibly complex' physical structures, it does not employ methodological naturalism. Thus, by modern standards, it cannot be called 'science.' So, by defining away the possibility of supernatural cause, ID cannot be "science". ID is pushed off the playing field.

Dudley fairly points out, "Just because modern science is characterized by methodological naturalism, that does not mean that it should be. The above characterization of science is descriptive, not normative... Perhaps 'science' should be re-defined, allowing the explanation of natural phenomena by both natural and supernatural means. Indeed, if God exists and created the universe, why shouldn't we look for God's supernatural intervention in natural affairs?"

Dudley poses the question: If you are claiming that something in nature has a supernatural cause "Why continue searching for a naturalistic explanation if you believe there isn't one?" Again we are into the philosophy of science, where worldviews clash.

He remarks, "If those at the Discovery Institute truly want to 'defeat scientific materialism,' perhaps they would be better served taking a cue from evangelical Christians doing respectable science. Francis Collins GRD '74, ex-director of the Human Genome Project, might be a good place to start. Those at the Discovery Institute could join Collins in emphasizing why evolutionary theory is not incompatible with belief in the supernatural." The implication is obvious, namely DI and its proponents do science which is not respectable. Then he uses the equivocal term "evolutionary theory". No Christian, who is intellectually honest could square Darwinism with their faith. However, common descent is at least a possibility with God front-loading the cosmos with information rich matter.

We need to more clearly define terms and more clear thinking on this subject, and Dudley is further along than most.

More...

Evolution News & Views comments on an article in Seattle Post-Intelligencer about Darwin Day. The reporter notes that the Discovery Institute marks the same occasion with a lecture and discussion on "Darwin Day and the Deification of Charles Darwin." On Darwin Day the Discovery Institute will broadcast a short lecture by Dr. John West and Dr. Jonathan Wells about Darwin and his impact on modern science. The 30 minute program will be available at ID The Future and on Youtube.

According to the article the film's maker, oceanographer Randy Olson, started out really liking the work of Discovery Institute, but only after they didn't want to appear in his film did he resort to motive mongering and distorting our position on evolution.

More...