Zygon 47 (2):289-297 (2012)

Authors
Christopher A. Pynes
Western Illinois University
Abstract
Abstract Jeffrey Koperski claims in Zygon (2008) that critics of Intelligent Design engage in fallacious ad hominem attacks on ID proponents and that this is a “bad way” to engage them. I show that Koperski has made several errors in his evaluation of the ID critics. He does not distinguish legitimate, relevant ad hominem arguments from fallacious ad hominem attacks. He conflates (or equates) the logical use of valid with the colloquial use of valid. Moreover, Koperski doesn't take seriously the legitimate concerns of the ID critics, and in doing so, commits the straw man fallacy. In the end, I show that no one disagrees with the criticism of improper use of fallacies as methods of evaluation. But what constitutes proper, relevant evaluation of the ID theorists and their motivation is a matter of dispute. And sometimes attacking a person as a method of evaluation is justified, and thus is not fallacious. The definition of ad hominem arguments as either a “good way” or a “bad way” rests on justification, which I argue ID opponents have. The basis for these good objections relies on the motivation many Christians have to share their faith with non-Christians, which they call the “great commission.”
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9744.2012.01254.x
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 51,480
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Humans in the Center?Willem B. Drees - 2012 - Zygon 47 (4):659-661.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Intelligent Design and the End of Science.Jeffrey Koperski - 2003 - American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 77 (4):567-588.
Ad Hominem Fallacies, Bias, and Testimony.Audrey Yap - 2013 - Argumentation 27 (2):97-109.
The Design Revolution. [REVIEW]Jeffrey Koperski - 2004 - American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 78 (4):674-679.
Hume and the Argument for Biological Design.Graham Oppy - 1996 - Biology and Philosophy 11 (4):519-534.
In Defence of Intelligent Design.William Dembski - 2006 - In Philip Clayton (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Religion and Science. Oxford University Press. pp. 715-731.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2012-05-23

Total views
138 ( #63,862 of 2,330,639 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
5 ( #151,630 of 2,330,639 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes