(no subject)

[dreamer_easy]

Unique Forms of Continuity in Space: see if you can guess which Doctor Who monster the design of which this 1913 sculpture inspired.

Flattering Year of Intelligent Tigers review. :)

The Media Matters Action Network site debunks various US political bs.

Questions Darwinism cannot answer. Still stuck on design, I think, but nonetheless raises some interesting points. (Another handy lesson from Paganism: universe first, gods second! :)

Comments

[kateorman.livejournal.com]

Darwin's been presented as justification for most of those, of course, but the does author seem to be confusing "Social Darwinism" with Darwinism. Possibly the extract is unhelpfully abbreviating his argument. Possibly not.

[zombie-buddha.livejournal.com]

I'm curious as to what interesting points you felt the article raised? It seems to me that the gist of it was 'evolutionary biology doesn't teach us moral lessons', which is one of those statements that is both true and intensely stupid.

[kateorman.livejournal.com]

I'm interested in the middle ground Frame seems to be clumsily groping for.

What are those existentialist quotes all about!

The idea of continuous creation interests me (compare and contrast with, for example, the "Darwinian pool table", in which God sets up the universe but then lets it run without interfering) - there's a gay-friendly church in the states which maintains that God hasn't finished speaking the Word yet, that there's more to come.

The idea that convergence suggests some sort of design is very interesting too, although I want to see exactly what Conway says - I suspect Frame may have fallen into ye olde teleological fallacy.

And the question "why is there something rather than nothing" always grabs my brain and bounces it around my skull. :)

ETA: I was right - the full text does makes more sense, particularly of Frame's harsh remarks about Dawkins.