tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post2825590533459890050..comments2024-03-27T14:50:47.345-04:00Comments on <center>Sandwalk</center>: Denyse O'Leary's University Course on Intelligent DesignLarry Moranhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05756598746605455848noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-58934486206399283372007-11-06T03:53:00.000-05:002007-11-06T03:53:00.000-05:00Eva is right, there is nothing wrong with what OLe...Eva is right, there is nothing wrong with what OLeary says about Kuhn. Well, more precisely, Oleary did indeed (correctly) *associate* him with falsification, but she did not *identify* him with it. He is associated with falsification precisely in that he explicitly opposed Popper and his idea of falsification as the demarcation of the scientific, and for more or less the very reason OLeary gave.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-37640655765031948532007-09-07T10:25:00.000-04:002007-09-07T10:25:00.000-04:00RT:I did admit in my post linking here that it is ...RT:<BR/><BR/>I did admit in my post linking here that it is a Cont. Ed. course, for which there are typically howlingly low standards and almost anything goes, since Cont. Ed. offerings normally don't have to pass any sort of quality control test.<BR/><BR/>But still, it's kind of depressing. <I>Caveat emptor</I>, as they say.CChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11406057201126015750noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-87613709684730507782007-09-07T10:09:00.000-04:002007-09-07T10:09:00.000-04:00I can't believe this is actually being taught in a...I can't believe this is actually being taught in a Canadian university and presented as being a "controversy." To describe it as such is a falsehood in itself.Red Toryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00422305796158017027noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-26502298616795294102007-09-06T18:43:00.000-04:002007-09-06T18:43:00.000-04:00But... she's incoherent! Is this a course that cou...But... she's incoherent! Is this a course that counts towards a degree?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-31615502336345326222007-09-06T14:54:00.000-04:002007-09-06T14:54:00.000-04:00Reputable scientists can be found on both sidesLes...<I>Reputable scientists can be found on both sides</I><BR/><BR/>Les Lane: <I>Her statement on "reputable scientists" doesn't quite capture the asymmetry.</I><BR/><BR/>If you assume a strictly positive definition for the word "reputable". I prefer to be more inclusive in my definition, and point out that it is possible to have a negative reputation. George W. Bush, for example, has a negative reputation among many people - they know who he is and what his current job is, and they dislike him.<BR/><BR/>My problem with the above statement is the term "scientist". If you're and IDiot, it's almost impossible to be a scientist at the same time, because IDiocy expressely forces one to abandon scientific principles including testable hypotheses.TheBrummellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08973380652057861796noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-50491376723092851812007-09-06T14:30:00.000-04:002007-09-06T14:30:00.000-04:00It should be interesting to hear what the theory o...It should be interesting to hear what the theory of ID is: What ID can explain, what it can't explain, and how to tell the difference between the two; The answers ID offers to Who, What, When, Where, Why, or How; ...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-28301620898293717242007-09-06T13:39:00.000-04:002007-09-06T13:39:00.000-04:00Which textbook will she use in her lectures? One ...Which textbook will she use in her lectures? One of her own, I take it?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-78425130308230012942007-09-06T12:51:00.000-04:002007-09-06T12:51:00.000-04:00Her statement on "reputable scientists" doesn't qu...Her statement on "reputable scientists" doesn't quite capture the asymmetry.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-55519758301120114492007-09-06T12:29:00.000-04:002007-09-06T12:29:00.000-04:00I don't think she associates Kuhn with falsificati...I don't think she associates Kuhn with falsification, but with the "not agreeing". Popper used falsification as measure of whether something was science or not, but Kuhn (probably) says you can't use falsification if two parties don't even agree on what to test. I'm not sure, need more info: please take the course and blog about it =)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com