The fundamentalist attack on science: A problem that won't just disappear
| Abstract | While “Intelligent Design” has garnered increasing support in America, its critics have been hesitant to address it publicly. In this paper I argue that it is important for defenders of evolution to take the supporters of intelligent design head-on. I refute the notion that the best way of addressing the threat posed by intelligent design is by ignoring it. I point out how academics’ unwillingness to speak publicly on the issue of intelligent design is symptomatic of a general reticence towards communicating with the public. Finally, I argue that this reticence is detrimental both to science and the general welfare. | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,709 |
| External links |
  Try with proxy. |
| Through your library | Only published papers are available at libraries |
Similar books and articlesElliott Sober (2008). Intelligent Design, Irreducible Complexity, and Minds—a Reply to John Beaudoin. Faith and Philosophy 25 (4):443-446.
Neil A. Manson (2004). Review of Niall Shanks, God, the Devil, and Darwin: A Critique of Intelligent Design Theory. [REVIEW] Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews 2004 (5).
B. A. Thomasson (2011). Arguing From the Evidence: The Correct Approach to Intelligent Design's Challenge in the U.S. Courts. Philosophy of the Social Sciences 41 (4):495-534.
Jeffrey Koperski (2003). Intelligent Design and the End of Science. American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 77 (4):567-588.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2009-01-28Total downloads7 ( #133,637 of 550,917 )Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,425 of 550,917 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
