Evolution, "Intelligent Design," Creationism

This group of essays is devoted to explaining various aspects of evolution or to criticizing creationist and "Intelligent Design" ideas and arguments.

 

A Scientific Intelligent Design Theory

This essay proposes an intelligent design theory that is actually scientific, in contrast with the anti-science the ID crowd puts out so voluminously. By presenting a real scientific theory, I hope people will more clearly see why the ID theory is not scientific.

 

The Key Fallacy of Dembski's Explanatory Filter

This essay exposes the false-alternative fallacy that ID depends on. Despite having written several books on ID, Dembski's argument still reduces to a childish false-alternative fallacy (and an argument from ignorance fallacy at the same time).

 

Mathematics, Information, Genetics, and Evolution

In this essay, I show that that the real problem with genetic information is not getting information into the genes, but getting it out when it is "incorrect" information (from a genetic survival standpoint). I then point out that this problem of getting incorrect information out of the genes is exactly what natural selection does, by "editing out" those genotypes that are not sufficiently "correct."

 

Basic Logical and Metaphysical Problems with "Intelligent Design" Theory

Here I show that the basic creationist argument that life is too complex to have evolved is self-refuting.

 

Physics, Information Theory, and Evolution

ID advocates, and many conventional creationists claim a truism as if it were somehow an argument against evolution: Proteins cannot put information into the genes that was not there. This is true, but irrelevant, since this is not part of, nor implied by, nor required for, the theory of evolution.

 

Hovind Asks Pseudo Questions About Evolution

Hovind "asks" a bunch of questions as a fraudulent challenge to evolutionists, apparently not grasping that several of them are not even relevant to the theory of evolution. He's apparently just making things up. I answer or refute the implicit assumed claims built into the questions, nearly all of which are of the "Have you stopped beating your wife?" type.


Philosophy, Psychology

This group of essays is a small sampling of my philosophical essays (the few that I feel are sufficiently well-edited (if not polished) that it's okay to let other people read them. The first two I consider most important. The third deals with the issue of determinism and its implications for morality.

 

The Rational Basis of Morality

A partly-novel approach to establishing the foundations and general outlines of an ethical theory. I argue (as others have, too) that we have to approach ethics from the point of view of a person who asks why we need morality at all. Besides the strictly foundational issues, a fuller ethics is explained but not fully or rigorously developed.

 

Naturalism vs. Supernaturalism Balance Sheet

This is large and systematic side-by-side comparison of supernaturalism and naturalism, exposing the flaws in supernaturalism with respect to epistemology, metaphysics, and ethical theory. It's not as detailed as I'd like, and there are some objections that I haven't gotten around to including and refuting, and some "twists" on the idea of the supernatural that need to be covered, but this essay fairly well covers and refutes the conventional mainstream ideas of supernaturalism, and should serve as a starting point even for refuting the esoteric versions.

 

Determinism as Necessary for Morality

This essay shows why, if there were such a thing as indeterministic free will, we couldn't rationally want it. An alternative compatibilist theory is sketched, in which free will is not the freedom to act in a certain way, but simply acting in a certain way (i.e., roughly, according to our rational judgment), and which therefore depends on determinism to establish a link between our values and what we in fact do.

 

Understanding Irrationality

A partial "general theory of stupidity" is presented. Several sources or motivational bases for irrationality are described. I also argue that reason as a faculty is natural but that developed, mature rationality is highly "unnatural" in that it must be learned and can only be learned with considerable effort, even in the best of conditions. It does not occur just as a concomitant of going about one's life; it has to be worked for. The main "cause" of irrationality is simply failure to learn to think and behave rationally.