Custom Search

Saturday, March 27, 2010

None of the Above: All the Modern Explanations for Religion Except the Most Obvious

id you know that: Religion is good for you; also, Religion is bad for you; also, Religion makes no difference; also, Religion can be explained by a God gene, or a meme, or part of the brain . . . or whatever the editor of your local paper’s “Relationships” section will buy for this weekend’s edition?

You didn’t know any of those things? Aw, no surprise. But never fear: One outreach of the new atheist movement, currently making its way around the lecture rooms of the nation, is the academic attempt to account for religious belief, and to do so on any basis whatsoever, except one.

We will get to that forbidden one in a moment. First, let’s look at the permitted ones.

Go here for more.

Anyway, if you are paying taxes for this, why are you? Has it never occurred to you that you might have been born free and able to make up your own mind?


Contest Question 23: YOU rank order the Top Ten ID media stories of the year

The Top Ten Darwin and Design Media News Stories for 2009 are here, and my comments on the latter are here.

Note, these are media stories.

But why should ARN do it all? We're not wizards; we just put our heads together once a year.

For a free copy of Stephen Meyer's Signature in the Cell (Harper One, 2009), the top rated 2009 ID resource, courtesy the Discovery Institute, explain:

1. How would you have rated the stories differently?


2. Are there stories that should have been on the list that are not?

Don't bother with my comments if they may influence your judgement. They won't influence mine. I probably forgot what I said anyway. So much stuff rolls through the system now ...

Let me put it like this: I can remember when ID only ever meant that card teenagers fake up, to buy beer.

In under 400 words. You can link at the comments box, so no need to reproduce swatches of copy if you don't want to use up your word count.

Go here to enter.

Here are the contest rules.

Also, a question I would welcome some help in answering: Why can’t regular media actually grapple with the issues around design? It’s like a nonsensical broken record endlessly replaying a commercial, of which the sponsors are in bankruptcy protection.

Find out why there is an intelligent design controversy:

Labels: ,

Who links to me?