This is a blog to discuss philosophy, chess, politics,
C. S. Lewis, or whatever it is that I'm in the mood to discuss.
It seems Barr has a much better handle on the issues than Richards. Barr's analysis of Dembski is excellent, for instance, Richards does nothing to defuse it.My impression is that many advocates of ID don't understand ID. I don't even know the number of times someone recommended I read Dembski's book that would then clam up and turn red when I would try to talk to them about it, about the details of the explanatory filter (I read the book very closely). Somehow many ID-christians absorbed, without actually reading or understanding the book, that Dembski had somehow settled things or provided a tour de force that would make actual scientists take it seriously once and for all.I'm not saying Richards is one of them, but reading his article it sure seems that way. Barr's summary/criticism of the explanatory filter is quite lucid, I'm jealous of his writing skills.
Post a Comment