Explore by Topic
Explore by Format
Search Results | 69 results found
In Nancy Pearcey’s excellent book, Saving Leonardo, she explains why Greek thought didn't create modern science:
Our culture needs to sit down and seriously think through some questions about what it means to be a human being. And I don't just mean the question, "When do rights begin in a human life?" I mean the big ones: What are we? What is the good life? Is the highest good the manufacturing of a "perfect" life, designed according to our specifications—one where every risk and difficulty is removed, even if at great expense to the life and liberty of others?
Stephen Meyer on whether or not it can be valid to infer a mind as an explanation of causation, from a recent dialogue on Unbelievable:
In an Unbelievable podcast discussing the question, "What was the primary cause of Nazi ideology—Darwinism or Christian anti-Semitism?" a listener asked, "Has Darwinism become prescriptive? When did this happen?"
New Scientist reports that University College London has published online what remains of Kantsaywhere, a novel by Darwin's cousin and eugenics-promoter, Francis Galton. Most of the book was destroyed by Galton's family after his death, and this article by Michael Marshall explains why:
Casey Luskin reviewed Richard Dawkins's new children's science book, The Magic of Reality over at Evolution News and Views. Here's a brief summary excerpt:
I sometimes hear atheists say that as science advances, religion retreats, and soon there will be no need for religion. It's a particularly narrow understanding of our relationship with God (speaking as a Christian here)—as if God's main function in our lives is to provide an explanation for events in nature. While some primitive, pagan religions may have focused on explaining and manipulating nature, the Bible presents quite a different picture of the true God.
In a video interview, Oxford physicist (and atheist) David Deutsch argues against reductionism (the idea that material causes can explain everything), saying that information is not material and consciousness exists. In the process, he makes four very important points:
Casey Luskin of the Discovery Institute writes an interesting article in response to a scientist’s statement that “the Intelligent Design hypothesis is untestable by science, exactly because we can never empirically know or understand the actions of God or any other Intelligent Designer.”
Promising news from the stem cell front: Scientists reported Thursday they had developed a technique that can quickly create safe alternatives to human embryonic stem cells, a major advance toward developing a less controversial approach for treating for a host of medical problems.