ID Dish: Darwinists Gone Wild!

Backstage sniping between Darwinists Michael Ruse, who talks graciously with religious people, and Daniel Dennett, who doesn't, is posted at Bill Dembski's blog Uncommon Descent:

DENNETT: I’m afraid you are being enlisted on the side of the forces of darkness. You may want to try to extricate yourself, since you are certainly losing ground fast in the evolutionary community that I am in touch with.

RUSE: I am a full professor with tenure at a university known chiefly for its prowess on the football field, living out my retirement years in the sunshine – I have no reputation to preserve, and frankly can say and do whatever the f**k I want to without sinking further. . . .

It is true that I condemn or at least want to point to evolutionism, which I do think functions as a secular religion – but never have I said that Darwinian evolutionary theory is anything but a genuine theory . . . [and] I have no more [religious] belief than either you or Dawkins . . .

I think that you and Richard are absolute disasters in the fight against intelligent design – we are losing this battle, not the least of which is the two new supreme court justices who are certainly going to vote to let it into classrooms – what we need is not knee-jerk atheism but serious grappling with the issues – neither of you are willing to study Christianity seriously and to engage with the ideas – it is just plain silly and grotesquely immoral to claim that Christianity is simply a force for evil, as Richard claims – more than this, we are in a fight, and we need to make allies in the fight, not simply alienate everyone of good will.

There's more.

(H/T: Wittingshire.)

Comments

[Richard Lawrence Cohen]

This potential split among Darwinists mirrors splits occurring among gay rights activists and anti-abortion activists, as Ann points out. In all three cases the question is, "Should a movement be defined by its extremes, or should it seek to woo moderates?"

[amba]

Good point. (Said split is also occurring among ... Democrats!)

[a china teapot]

I'm with Dennett, religion is a social phenomenon which science should study.

Religion is all about persuading people to (claim to) hold beliefs for which there is no supporting evidence.

Science, at its very best, is about encouraging people to continually challenge the accepted world view in order that we can learn more about the world.

The "moderate" scientists need Dennett, Dawkins, Blackmore & co. out at the cutting edge of their subject in order to stop the, so called "moderates" being labeled as extremists.

[Joshua Taj Bozeman]

I would assume you don't know many religions people tea pot. Only a fool would devote their lives to something that has no logic/reasoning/evidence behind it.

As a Christian, I work on a number of areas of evidence that support my worldview. Science, historical evidences, archeology, and much more.

I don't know of anyone I've ever met or have seen on TV, interviews, websites, etc. that try to get people to religion based on a lack of evidence for the foundation of the religion. That's just silly.

[amba]

Joshua, you should read the comment in this thread posted by Michael -- scroll down to the 11th comment. It's a remarkably good argument for the existence of God, penned by an atheist as part ofJewish Atheist's "Opposite Day" experiment.

[a china teapot]

Joshua

Open your eyes and examine the evidence.

There is no evidence for the existance of any of the gods from any of the world religions.

There is plenty of evidence that lots of people CLAIM that they exist, and the christian method of dealing with non-believers has been to burn them alive. So lost of people say they believe out of fear.

[karen]

I kinda like the Freudian ~lost~ mis-spelling. I guess in Nigeria they burn 'em dead, now. Unfortunately- humans screw up about 99.94% of everything they touch (IMhumbleO)- so it isn't surprising that we have a hell of a hard time reproducing Christlike lov ein the world.

It doesn't mean we stop trying. Some things are best left taken on Faith.

[Two Dishes]

Although I don't at all believe in I.D. I enjoyed reading this site a lot. Well done. Though an outsider to the POV, I felt welcome here and maybe learned something. Thanks.