Paul Feyerabend wants to isolate science in order to save cultures and politics. In an autobiographical chapter of Against Method, he explains his discomfort at teaching Western Imperialistic Science to diverse and multi-ethnic students. He laments the destruction of so many ways of thinking in the search for The One Big Truth. He writes that science has its ways of thinking and that other believe systems have theirs. That's his imagined motive.
Unfortunately, what he really does is try to undermine science completely. The real motive is nothing more than the familiar one among humanists: "Science Bad, Art Good." Undermining science is not a way of showing that science has its own ways of thinking; rather it is the way of supporting superstitions and ignorance.
Showing posts with label Science. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Science. Show all posts
Why "Intelligent Design" is not Science
"Intelligent Design" (ID) writers try to use Thomas Kuhn's theories to justify their approach, but they focus exclusively on the most rare of scientific happenings: the paradigm shift that occurs during revolutionary science. During a revolutionary period of science, two scientists operating from differing paradigms can literally look at the same evidence and see it differently -- both finding the evidence that supports their own paradigm. Ken Ham in his "Answers in Genesis" website uses the analogy of taking off the evolutionary sunglasses and putting on the ID sunglasses. You can literally look at the same evidence in two ways.
However, ID writers fail to include the other 99% of science. During normal science, there are research projects to pursue. Kuhn calls normal science "puzzle solving." The only reason why one paradigm can overtake another is that it offers better solutions to puzzles -- it offers research projects -- it gives scientists something to do.
ID does not give scientists anything to do. The basic idea in "Intelligent Design" is that things are so complicated that we just cannot understand how they work -- it must be the product of a superior intelligence! What does an ID scientist do? I guess he goes outside, notices how terribly complicated everything is, and says, "Gee, God must have done it! Well, now I'm done." There are no research projects. There are no puzzles to solve. There is nothing to do. That is the opposite of science.
However, ID writers fail to include the other 99% of science. During normal science, there are research projects to pursue. Kuhn calls normal science "puzzle solving." The only reason why one paradigm can overtake another is that it offers better solutions to puzzles -- it offers research projects -- it gives scientists something to do.
ID does not give scientists anything to do. The basic idea in "Intelligent Design" is that things are so complicated that we just cannot understand how they work -- it must be the product of a superior intelligence! What does an ID scientist do? I guess he goes outside, notices how terribly complicated everything is, and says, "Gee, God must have done it! Well, now I'm done." There are no research projects. There are no puzzles to solve. There is nothing to do. That is the opposite of science.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
