Is Your Father's Creationism?

3min Snip

00:00

Play full episode

Summary

Transcript

Episode notes

I should tell people that this is far more serious. Your book is harper collins, semmin and n. And you know, i have a shelf full of books, professional philosophers and scientists addressing your claim. You're getting a hearing. It's being taken seriously. This is not your father's creationism. So it's worth discussing. I'm arguing for more than the concept of god,. although the concept of god functions as as an explanatory hypothesis. Because it provide such a a compelling explanation of key facts we have about biological, physical and cosmological origins. We have good reason to believe that the concept is also referring to a reality in the same way en theoretical physics

Beginning in the late 19th century, many intellectuals began to insist that scientific knowledge conflicts with traditional theistic belief — that science and belief in God are “at war.” Philosopher of science Stephen Meyer challenges this view by examining three scientific discoveries with decidedly theistic implications. Building on the case for the intelligent design of life that he developed in Signature in the Cell and Darwin’s Doubt, Meyer claims that discoveries in cosmology and physics coupled with those in biology help to establish the identity of the designing intelligence behind life and the universe. Previously Meyer refrained from attempting to answer questions about “who” might have designed life. Now he provides an evidence-based answer to perhaps the ultimate mystery of the universe.

Shermer responds to each claim and a stimulating and enlightening conversation ensues.

Note: It is Dr. Shermer’s intention in his podcast to periodically talk to people with whom skeptics and scientists may disagree. In some episodes Dr. Shermer tries to “steel man” a position held by someone with differing views — that is, he says in his own words what he thinks the other person is arguing — but in this case the other person is in the conversation and can represent his own position clearly, which is what happens. As well, such conversations enable principles of skepticism to be employed in ways constructive to those who hold views not necessarily embraced by skeptics and scientists. Such principles should be embraced by all seekers of truth, and that is why we want to talk to people with whom we may disagree.