Talk:Intelligent Design

From dKosopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

This article is in very poor shape. Would anyone object if I dropped the Wikipedia article into here and modified it a bit? Since both are under the GFDL this can be done. Joshua 14:14, 22 February 2007 (PST)

I would. Why not rewrite this one and make it comeptitive with the usual dry fare on Wikipedia? PoP.

Have you looked at how detail the Wikipedia article is on this subject? The article would be a featured article (the highest level for a Wikipedia article) if not for objections by various pro-ID partisans. It would me much easier to take the Wikipedia article and modify it so that it fit the Dkos viewpoint. Joshua 14:26, 22 February 2007 (PST)
If you want to draw information from Wikipedia that's fine but the text here ought to do more than just replicate.
Hence I said would be modified. Among other issues, I intend to modify it to be much less charitable to ID. Joshua 14:35, 22 February 2007 (PST)
So no wholesale copying. More like "bits" added from Wiki to elaborate on the material in the exiting article. Good.

Crazy. Just copy and paste the thing from Wikipedia and then edit it. Wikipedia has done a fantastic job that the current stub is poorly lacking in every conceivable area.

Progress?

This topic is important, but it appears that nothing has been done with it for a while. There are currently sort of two articles in the same space. Since the writers above didn't bother to sign, it's hard to tell when they wrote their comments.

Practically speaking, I think what people most need, for the short haul, is some short and powerful arguments to throw wrenches into the gears of creationists who attempt to use their arguments to gain control of school boards, etc. For the long haul, it wouldn't even be a problem if most people understood that science goes from carefully checked and rechecked evidence to provisional empirical generalizations (theories), whereas creationism and other such beliefs go from what they see as absolute truth to rationalizations and quasi-evidence to prop their beliefs up and to make them seem more plausible to people who are not prepared to see the manipulation.

One short argument for the intelligent design people would be: "I agree with you. My holy source tells me apodictically that Earth was seeded with life by the Master Race, and when they come back they are going to be really pissed to see what we've done with the place."p0m 20:53, 31 March 2008 (PDT)

"Restoration of theocracy"

This line is misleading: "ID became a key entry point for fundamentalists in their actual ultimate quest: the restoration of theocracy"

America has never been a theocracy, so "restoration" doesn't make sense.

Right. So why don't you change it? ~~
Personal tools