Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re: Well good (Score 1) 2443

by xikzantric (#14303183) Attached to: Federal Judge Rules Against Intelligent Design
You are correct in saying that ID (in a biological science sense) is not discussed much outside of the US, but continental European philosophers began writing about it hundreds of years ago as a philosophy.

As to "It works the other way around", yes it does. However, I am not claiming my own credibility or authority on this matter, but the credibility of a very respected philosophy department. Feel free to write to some of U of M's philosphers and question their decision to include ID in their curriculum.

U of M and MSU are different schools, which some people don't realize, but that doesn't really matter. More importantly, having a philosphy professor take the time to write a paper attempting to refute a philosphical idea (in this case ID, per your example) does make it a philosophical idea worthy of discussion. Otherwise he would not have taken the time to write about it. Thanks for making my point. I'd bet every philosophy ever imagined has had someone write a paper refuting it; you can't claim that something is wrong simply because a paper has been written trying to discredit it.

Again, I am not writing to say that I agree with ID. I'm just saying that it is indeed a philosophy that merits discussion by some of the best philosophers in the world.

It seems that more and more mathematicians are using a new, high level language named "research student".

Working...