Darwinism and popular culture: Tell me again that Darwinism isn't a religion?

Please keep telling me because events keep making me forget ...

Note: The recently advertised podcasts are below.

A press release just landed in my mailbox for Creation, a pro-Darwin film to be aired at the Toronto International Film Festival, according to which we learn,

“Creation” is the story of Charles Darwin and his master-work "The Origin of Species." It tells the story of the world-renowned scientist, crushed by the loss of a daughter, who conceives a book about the non-existence of God and the global revolution played out in the confines of a small English village.

Oh, so that's what it really is all about then?

Someone from the BBC wants to interview me. I am not sure about that, because I am concerned that they are looking for a gap-tooth Canadian moron to spout Bible verses, rock the tent, and handle snakes. I'm okay with the last, with proper tools, though not as a religious exercise. (In case anyone cares, the main thing is to grab the snake firmly by the neck with long-handled tongs, at which point he has no further defences.)

As I have pointed out many times, the issues around the Darwin cult have never been politicized in Canada, for good political reasons. Various Darwinists have also tried to flog up a big scare about Canadians being afraid of science, but it is rubbish. Maybe the BBC will believe it though.

Aw, let 'em believe what they want. Bring it on.

Find out the real reasons that there is an intelligent design controversy:

Podcasts in the intelligent design controversy, with my comments

Podcasts in the intelligent design controversy 1: Evolution's Glass Ceiling

Podcasts in the intelligent design controversy 2: Rebutting Methodological Materialism: Interview With Angus Menuge, Part Two

Podcasts in the intelligent design controversy 3: Agents Under Fire: Part One With Angus Menuge

Podcasts in the intelligent design controversy 4: Hitler's Ethic and the Pursuit of Evolutionary Progress in Nazi Policy

Podcasts in the intelligent design controversy 5: Seeking God in Science: An Atheist
Defends Intelligent Design

Podcasts in the intelligent design controversy 6: Back to school with real science

(Note: If you follow me at Twitter, you will get regular notice of new Post-Darwinist posts, usually when I have posted five or so stories.)

Podcasts in the intelligent design controversy 1: Evolution's Glass Ceiling

On this episode of ID the Future, acclaimed author and Discovery Institute senior fellow David Klinghoffer takes a look at the academic freedom — or lack thereof — for scientists who support intelligent design, scientists who are forced to don disguises and go underground in order to protect their careers.

This podcast is based on Mr. Klinghoffer's commentary in Townhall Magazine, "Evolution's Glass Ceiling."

Go here to listen.

[From Denyse: Yeah, tell me about it. I hear this stuff all the time. It was hilarious to hear people insisting that the Expelled film was false at the same time as expulsions continue, with their approval I suspect. It is hard for materialists to accept a genuine challenge. They are used to continued tactical retreats, usually from well-meaning tenured theists who hope to be treated nicely. Not a chance, if you go by the "new atheists." But things are slowly changing.]

Next: Podcasts in the intelligent design controversy 2: Rebutting Methodological Materialism: Interview With Angus Menuge, Part Two

Find out why there is an intelligent design controversy, anyway:

Podcasts in the intelligent design controversy 2: Rebutting Methodological Materialism: Interview With Angus Menuge, Part Two

On this episode of ID the Future, Casey Luskin interviews Dr. Angus Menuge on his latest research, including his arguments rebutting methodological materialism, a defense of downward mental causation, and a non-materialist theory of information. Listen in as he shares from his experience debating PZ Myers on how neuroscience actually points to the existence of non-material causes.

Go here to listen.

[From Denyse: I've never had much use for methodological naturalism because, in practice, despite emphatic disclaimers by theists in science, it heavily weights research in sensitive areas toward a materialist standpoint. That is, a materialist theory can be as stupid as the Big Bazooms theory of human evolution and yet appear to make more sense than the obvious immateriality of information and the mind that apprehends it.

See also: Science and society: Methodological naturalism as the religious link between science and government-sponsored atheism]

Introduction to The Spiritual Brain.

Methodological naturalism: If that's the way forward, let's go sideways]

Next: Podcasts in the intelligent design controversy 3: Agents Under Fire: Part One With Angus Menuge

(Note: If you follow me at Twitter, you will get regular notice of new Post-Darwinist posts, usually when I have posted five or so stories.)

Podcasts in the intelligent design controversy 3: Agents Under Fire: Part One With Angus Menuge

On this episode of ID the Future, Casey Luskin interviews Dr. Angus Menuge, professor of philosophy at Concordia University Wisconsin and author of Agents Under Fire, Materialism and the Rationality of Science. Dr. Menuge shares how he got involved in the debate over intelligent design and what made him a skeptic of Darwinian evolution. Listen in as Dr. Menuge explains what is necessary for the Darwinian account of evolutionary complex systems. Go here to listen.

[From Denyse: Menuge was one of the people attacked in a recent New Scientist article, raising alarms about non-materialist neuroscience. He replied here. Recently, there have been a number of attempts to show how atheist materialism is compatible with free will and traditional Christian assumptions in general, but essentially, not only is it not compatible, it was never intended to be. It was intended not not to be. That's the critical point. Christian academics can delude themselves if they wish, flirting with Christian Darwinism or Christian materialism, but the aggressively hostile "new atheist" movement makes the reality crystal clear.]

Next: Podcasts in the intelligent design controversy 4: Hitler's Ethic and the Pursuit of Evolutionary Progress in Nazi Policy

Podcasts in the intelligent design controversy 4: Hitler's Ethic and the Pursuit of Evolutionary Progress in Nazi Policy

On this episode of ID the Future, Logan Gage interviews historian Richard Weikart on his new book, Hitler’s Ethic: The Nazi Pursuit of Evolutionary Progress, and how Darwinism influenced and inspired much of Nazi ideology.

Weikart’s provocative book, out tomorrow, argues that Hitler's immorality was not the result of ignoring or rejecting ethics, but rather came from embracing a coherent -- albeit pernicious -- ethic of improving the human race through "evolutionary progress." Directly inspired by Darwin's theory of evolution, this ethic underlay or influenced almost every major feature of Nazi policy: eugenics (i.e., measures to improved human heredity, including compulsory sterilization), euthanasia, racism, population expansion, offensive warfare, and racial extermination. By embracing this particular brand of ethics, Hitler perpetrated much greater evil than he would have had he been merely opportunistic or amoral.

Go here to listen.

[From Denyse: Personally, I have never understood why Darwin's fans freak out when anyone tries to talk about the relationship between Darwinism and eugenics, Darwinism and racism, and Darwinism and the Nazis.

It is a hands down, no contest fact that Darwin made eugenics and racism seem "scientific." There was a time when racism depended on obscure arguments from the Bible and such, but Darwin changed all that with The Descent of Man. There is no question, either, that the Nazis were inspired in part by German translations of Darwin's Descent. Dr. Weikart has been subjected to predicable attempts to muddy the waters by claiming that someone other than Darwin is always to blame for making mayhem respectable.

To one such effort, Weikart replies,

Hoppe claims in this blog that Bronn inserted progressivism into Darwin’s theory in his translation of _Origin of Species_. However, anyone reading _Origin_ carefully can find many passages where Darwin embraced progressivism, for example:

Thus, from the war of nature, from famine and death, the most exalted object which we are capable of conceiving, namely, the production of the higher animals, directly follows.

This is laced with progressivism, and many other passages reinforce this point.

The part I find intriguing is that the Darwin fans would do themselves such a big favour if they just admitted it and got past it. No one holds them responsible individually or collectively for what happened in centuries past. It is their continued defensiveness and misrepresentation, creating a continued need to set the record straight, that keeps the issue alive. And they have only themselves to blame for that.

See also:

Expelled: Did Darwin really lead to Hitler? Better question: Did the suggestion lead tofree publicity?

Finnish school shooter: Social Darwinism's role in mass murder

O'Leary's review of Weikart's seminal work From Darwin to Hitler.
]
Next: Podcasts in the intelligent design controversy 5: Seeking God in Science: An Atheist
Defends Intelligent Design

Podcasts in the intelligent design controversy 5: Seeking God in Science: An Atheist Defends Intelligent Design

In this ID the Future podcast, Casey Luskin interviews Bradley J. Monton, Associate Professor of Philosophy at the University of Colorado, Boulder, about his new book Seeking God in Science: An Atheist Defends Intelligent Design (Broadview Press, 2009). As the book’s title suggests, Monton is an atheist who feels that some intelligent design (ID) arguments hold merit and are worth taking seriously. Listen to this podcast as Monton explains how ID-critics commonly dismiss the theory through fallacious objections that do not address the actual arguments of ID-proponents.

Go here to listen.

[From Denyse: I've written about Monton before, here. Here's his book on the subject, and here's his view of the recent Bloggingheads controversy (That ol' time magic! ID theorist disappears in broad Internet daylight). Monton, as I read him, is an atheist of the old, rational school, like Antony Flew (before he became a deist/theist). He thinks the ID theorists are wrong, but agrees that - based on evidence - they have a case worth arguing. He is clearly far more interested in pursuing ideas than in protecting institutions, but that's what a philosopher should be, and shame on those who aren't.]

Next: Podcasts in the intelligent design controversy 6: Back to school with real science

(Note: If you follow me at Twitter, you will get regular notice of new Post-Darwinist posts, usually when I have posted five or so stories.)

Podcasts in the intelligent design controversy 6: Back to school with real science

This episode of ID the Future features part two of an interview with Dr. Rebecca Keller, who discusses the nature of science and interpretation and how it applies to science education. Her textbooks focus on the practice of science, and are available at Gravitas Publications.

Dr. Keller holds a Ph.D. in Biophysical Chemistry from the University of New Mexico, spent years doing biochemical research on molecular machines, and is an outspoken proponent of teaching students about both the scientific strengths and weaknesses of Darwinian evolution. She is also the CEO of Gravitas Publications, which publishes the Real Science for Kids textbook series, providing textbooks that equip children with the tools they need to become scientific thinkers.

Go here to listen. nd here is an additional podcast with Keller, "Challenging ideas promotes good science education."

[From Denyse: In my view, if you can't teach both the strengths and weaknesses of any theory, including Darwinism, you can't teach rational thinking, let alone scientific thinking. And when you hear the Darwinist say that there simply are no weaknesses in his theory, you are hearing a fanatic. There are weaknesses in any theory, yes, even Newton's theory of gravity. Gravity is a poor fit with the other three fundamental forces of the universe, and that has bothered physicists for a long time. I don't say little kids should be bugged with this stuff, but senior high school students, yes. That is, if it really is a public school, and not a fundamentalist's revival tent or an extremist madrassa.]

Find out why there is an intelligent design controversy: