|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,902 Year: 4,159/9,624 Month: 1,030/974 Week: 357/286 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Evolution on Trial by Bill Whitehouse | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Moe Inactive Member |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminNosy Administrator Posts: 4754 From: Vancouver, BC, Canada Joined: |
It's nice to have new books pointed out. However, it is best if you offer your own opinions on the book and some discussion of it's contents.
Thanks for the input though. And a big welcome to EvC. Comments on moderation procedures (or wish to respond to admin messages)? - Go to: General discussion of moderation procedures Thread Reopen Requests Considerations of topic promotions from the "Proposed New Topics" forum Introducing the new "Boot Camp" forum Other useful links: Forum Guidelines, Observations about Evolution and This could be interesting....
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Quetzal Member (Idle past 5901 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
Hi moe, welcome to EvCForum.
Have you read the book? I'd be interested to hear your take on it. Much of the book is available free on-line here. Whitehouse himself seems to be an interesting character, but much of his writing deals with "novelized" accounts of Sufi mysticism and spirituality. Hard to see (without reading the thing in its entirety) what he's on about. Love to hear your ideas, or anyone's perspective on the book. Edited by Quetzal, : I'm really having problems with ubb code today
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 314 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
Well, his introduction contains lots of mistakes, and the rest of the book consists of alternately putting two cases (as in a trial, hence the title) one of which he clearly doesn't understand.
Oh, that's useful. I have a sudden urge to reread the transcript of the Dover Pandas Trial. That had real scientists in it, and actually happened; and as such is more interesting than a wish-fulfillment fantasy.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Moe Inactive Member |
Thank you for the welcome! I am reading the book right now and may have some comments soon. I'm reading some of the postings here in this forum right now.
But this comes from Whitehouse's introduction: "More specifically, if an individual cannot grasp the point-counterpoint of the discussion in this E-Book, then, one is not in a conceptual position to honestly argue either for, or against, evolutionary theory. Whatever one might have to say on such issues will be entirely derived from the opinions of others - opinions that may, or may not, be true and concerning which one will have no direct, personal understanding, knowledge or insight." I have completely read The Chaco Canyon Tapes, a novel from which Evolution on Trial was taken out of due to its complexity. Many people aren't interested enough in these issues to wade through dense material. We'll soon see if I'm one of those who should stick to less demanding material. I especially find reading e-books online difficult, so I'm reading the actual book now. I'll keep you posted. And thanks again for the welcome. Moe
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Quetzal Member (Idle past 5901 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
"More specifically, if an individual cannot grasp the point-counterpoint of the discussion in this E-Book, then, one is not in a conceptual position to honestly argue either for, or against, evolutionary theory. Whatever one might have to say on such issues will be entirely derived from the opinions of others - opinions that may, or may not, be true and concerning which one will have no direct, personal understanding, knowledge or insight." I read that in his introduction as well. I'm always a bit concerned when I encounter the rhetorical equivalent of "if you don't agree with me, you're too stupid to understand the argument". That and his conflation of abiogenesis with evolution doesn't bode well for the rest of the book. I'll be curious to see if he does any better in presenting the pro- vs. con- arguments in detail. The skim I did of the rest (admittedly superficial), seems to present his protagonist Corrigan as a poor, innocent teacher who's only "crime" was to teach the controversy. Not a good thing if the author is claiming that all he wants to do is give everyone an understanding of the issue.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Moe Inactive Member |
You have read more into that quote than I see in it. I don't see anywhere where he is saying if you don't agree with me this or that. Wasn't Scopes portrayed as just a simple, sincere, honest teacher of biology? The fact that he is portrayed this way has nothing to say about the merits of the case. So even if Corrigan is being portrayed in the novel as a poor, innocent teacher whose only crime was to go astray of the power structure, this really has nothing to do with the substantive issues, and, as such, constitutes something of a fossilized red herring which misdirects attention away from the actual evidential issues. It is a novel, after all.
Moe
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
subbie Member (Idle past 1284 days) Posts: 3509 Joined: |
Well, his introduction contains lots of mistakes,.... What's more, he's every bit as accurate with the law as he is with the science. Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin Franklin
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Moe Inactive Member |
Hi Subbie,
What mistakes are made about that law? I've spent 23 years in courtrooms. Did you read this closely enough to understand it is a moot court? Please cite examples of mistakes, if you have the time. Otherwise, I will assume that maybe in this particular instance you have made the mistakes. Moe
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 314 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
Thank you for the welcome! I am reading the book right now and may have some comments soon. I'm reading some of the postings here in this forum right now. But this comes from Whitehouse's introduction: "More specifically, if an individual cannot grasp the point-counterpoint of the discussion in this E-Book, then, one is not in a conceptual position to honestly argue either for, or against, evolutionary theory. Whatever one might have to say on such issues will be entirely derived from the opinions of others - opinions that may, or may not, be true and concerning which one will have no direct, personal understanding, knowledge or insight." Well, that's what he says in his introuduction. This is what he says while he's swanking about about how smart he is. The fact is that in his introduction he just gets evolution wrong, and his book is doomed from that point onwards. One cannot discuss an idea until one understands it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Moe Inactive Member |
I'm here to learn. How does he "get evolution wrong"? Please be specific or I will assume you are mistaken.
Moe
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 314 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
Please read the introduction or I shall assume that you are lazy.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Quetzal Member (Idle past 5901 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
You have read more into that quote than I see in it. I don't see anywhere where he is saying if you don't agree with me this or that. Wasn't Scopes portrayed as just a simple, sincere, honest teacher of biology? It is of course possible I'm reading too much into it, but that was I'm afraid the initial impression I got when I read it. And indeed, Scopes was protrayed "as an innocent teacher", even though found guilty ultimately. It is quite obvious that Whitehouse is using that intentionally - sort of an "anti-Scopes". I'm not trying to pooh-pooh the book - I haven't read the whole thing, obviously. Just wanted to get some of my initial impressions out. I'm interested to hear what you think about it, whether the presentations are in fact even-handed, and what particular arguments/evidence Yardley presents.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Moe Inactive Member |
I have read the introduction. You are evading the question now.
I'm just asking you to be specific. If you can't be or won't be, I will assume you are mistaken. Moe
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 314 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
You are now asking me to do your homework for you.
Ordinarily, I should tell you to get up off your lazy arse and do it yourself. But I do have a few spare minutes, so I'll help you out. You will find that people are more likely to do this if you say "please". Wait.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024