Goodenough Gismo

  • Gismo39
    This is the classic children's book, Goodenough Gismo, by Richmond I. Kelsey, published in 1948. Nearly unavailable in libraries and the collector's market, it is posted here with love as an "orphan work" so that it may be seen and appreciated -- and perhaps even republished, as it deserves to be. After you read this book, it won't surprise you to learn that Richmond Irwin Kelsey (1905-1987) was an accomplished artist, or that as Dick Kelsey, he was one of the great Disney art directors, breaking your heart with "Pinocchio," "Dumbo," and "Bambi."

  • 74%How Addicted to Blogging Are You?

  • Google

Blogs I love and/or learn from

« Happy Birthday, Abie Baby! | Main | A fit of compassionate conservatism »



You have presented great coverage of the ID debate, but I wonder this. Has anyone in ID addressed the Kantian philosophical problem with it? Namely that the ordered structures and inherent logic in the human brain is being imposed on the outer environment, not that those structures exist within it? I'm sure this topic has been addressed, but I was curious given your level of literacy on the subject.


Thanks for posting that, and I hope it draws an answer from someone more literate than I am. In fact, maybe I'll take the bull by the horns and forward it to one of my eminent correspondents.

I'm just guessing that they'll say something like this: the "ordered structures and inherent logic in the human brain," whether you think they evolved or were designed, have a necessary correspondence to complexity in the world. That's why the brain "works" to help us understand and innovate, survive and thrive.


I guess you could counter it that way, but the Kantian argument implies the world may not be as ordered as it appears at all, or of even the same nature as it appears. The "nature" and "order" is in a sense in our heads and may not truly exist. Because we cannot step outside of our own senses and the inherent logic in our brain, we can never understand the ontological reality of the world around us.

Our perfect instruments and "science" are really only a projection of ourselves. That's at least the formula Kant created that isolated religion and science originally. Religion to him was something infinite, a reality beyond the grasp of our understanding and senses and thus something unjudgeable by science. The Critique of Pure Reason was meant to put metaphysics to rest, and for a very long time it succeeded.


Please. Kant's basically a solipsist. He can't even validly claim the universe exists. The fact that he writes his philosophy is inconsistent with his philosophy.

Check out Stanley L Jaki's Means to Message.


The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

New on FacTotem, my Natural History Blog

Jacques' Story: Escape From the Gulag

The AmbivAbortion Rant

Debating Intelligent Design


  • Listed on Blogwise

Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 08/2004