Agents Under Fire, Materialism and the Rationality of Science

Rating:
Summary: Excellent critique of naturalism
Review: Philosophical naturalism is frequently advocated as the only doctrine that a scientifically informed intellectual of our time can possibly consider. Angus Menuge has shown, however, that a wide range of powerful considerations can be brought forward against this philosophy. Menuge provides a close examination of leading naturalists such as Dawkins, Dennett and Churchland, and draws upon a wide range of critics from C. S. Lewis to Michael Behe, to provide what is arguably the most comprehensive critique of naturalism yet to appear. People who are interested in the Argument from Reason should be especially interested in Menuge's disucssion. A must read for naturalists and for their opponents.





Rating:
Summary: I'd give it a zero if I could, and every other book of his
Review: That's after reading his obscurantist lies about ID in "Debating Design."

In a number of ways and forms, he repeatedly claims in his essay in "Debating Design" that Intelligent Design is not religiously based. He also claimed it does not have a "hidding agenda to undermine scientific materialism."

Well, that part he got correct, as the agenda isn't hidden. Nor is the nreligious intent, even though the Discovery Institute long ago pulled the official "wedge strategy" off its website.

I'm sure you've read it, but I'll take some direct quotes from it to refute you.

"We are building on this momentum, broadening the wedge with a positive scientific alternative to materialistic scientific theories. Discovery Institute's Center for the Renewal of Science and Culture seeks nothing less than the overthrow of materialism and its cultural legacies." That tackles the *non-hidden* agenda.

Now about ID's religious roots.

"[T]he Center explores how new developments in biology, physics and cognitive science raise serious doubts about scientific materialism and have re-opened the case for a broadly theistic understanding of nature."
Theistic, that wouldn't be religious, would it?

"The Center awards fellowships for original research, holds conferences, and briefs policymakers about the opportunities for life after materialism."
Life after materialism... that wouldn't be a resurrection or similar, would it -- and inasmuch as not all religions believe in a personalized afterlife, this not only wouldn't be religious, it wouldn't be Western monotheistically religious, would it?

"Alongside a focus on influential opinion-makers, we also seek to build up a popular base of support among our natural constituency, namely, Chnstians."
That wouldn't just be one of three Western monotheistic religions, would it now?

Oh, and your attacks on Barbara Forrest for claiming ID is stealth creationism?

"Governing goals ...To replace materialistic explanations with the theistic understanding that nature and hurnan beings are created by God." Created by God... that wouldn't be creationism, would it?

I'm going to be blunt, Dr. Menuge. You're either lying, or else you're willfully obscurantist about the movement you profess to be defending.

Now, you and I both know which of these is the more likely answer. And no, the two answers aren't a false dilemma.

So, you, a **professor of philosophy,** supposed to be teaching others about a love for truth, resort to blatant lies about Intelligent Design. Not very ethical for a professor at a Christian university, is it?

While Philip Johnson, the author of the Wedge Strategy, may not have been the founder of ID per se, he is certainly one of its top four or five guiding lights today. And, I've not seen Behe, Dembski, Meyer or others, including yourself, disavow either Johnson or the strategy.