Category: Ethics

9/11 Miracle — the story of Trinidadian Genelle Guzman-McMillan, last WTC 9/11 survivor to be pulled from the rubble

Trinidadian Genelle Guzman-McMillan, the last WTC 9/11 survivor to be pulled from the rubble of the collapsed towers, has a story of miraculous survival, complete with her angel, Paul, who held her hand as she awaited rescue. In summary: [Genelle] was a Port Authority worker, working on the 64th floor of one of the WTC […] more

VIDEO: Jon Rittenhouse’s BB ST 450 course lecture on Scientism

Ran across this Biola video lecture (in course BB ST 450) on scientism in a thread from a few months back, HT BA77 as usual. I think it is well worth pondering: embedded by Embedded VideoYouTube Direkt So, thoughts? END more

C.S. Lewis said it better about the supposed evolution of morality and free will

Lewis: “At the moment, then, of Man’s victory over Nature, we find the whole human race subjected to some individual men, and those individuals subjected to that in themselves which is purely `natural’—to their irrational impulses.” more

FYI-FTR, 5: Euler rebukes the so-called “freethinkers” . . . another voice from the past we need to heed

Anyone who has done any serious mathematics needs no introduction to the name Leonhard Euler, one of the all time greats of Mathematics. For those who do, let me simply clip the opening words of the Wiki biographical article: a pioneering Swiss mathematician and physicist. He made important discoveries in fields as diverse as infinitesimal […] more

How do you derive moral principles from theism?

Usually this is not a topic I deal with, but an UD commenter gently asked such interesting question in another thread. Theism states a transcendent Principle, which is One and Infinite. This Unity is the First cause of the universal existence, of all beings and all things (for this reason He is also the Great […] more

FYI-FTR, 5: A BA 77 update — Dr Jerry Bergman lectures on the longstanding career and reputation slaughter of Darwin doubters

BA 77 has found another vid on the Slaughter of the Dissidents that reminds us of what the sort of evo mat promotion stunts we see going on in and around UD can all too often end up as: embedded by Embedded VideoYouTube Direkt A couple of stills can help us understand what Darwinist agit-prop […] more

FYI-FTR, # 4: You can’t make this up . . . KeithS and ilk dig in further — StephenB asks, is there any one there (apart from KeithS) who is uncertain of his self-aware existence?

Some things you can’t make up in a novel, they would be too implausible to be salable. But reality itself has no such constraints. As onlookers know, over the past several days — cf. here and here, we have been back to the issue of KeithS and his fellow evolutionary materialists (and their fellow travellers […] more

FYI-FTR, # 3: KeithS doubles down on sawing off the branch on which he sits, via po-mo certainty that we cannot be certain (oopsie . . . ), multiplies it by turnabout “liar-liar, your’e a hypocrite” rhetoric

We live in an intellectually impoverished and too often uncivil era, with the rise of evolutionary materialist scientism (as in: a priori evolutionary materialist “Science” is all of ‘real’ knowledge) having no small part of the responsibility. So, it is no real surprise to see one KeithS, one of the Darwinist anti-UD web patrol doubling […] more

FYI-FTR, # 2: KeithS of TSZ and other objecting sites, inadvertently shows the self-referential absurdity of evolutionary materialism and its fellow traveller po-mo ideologies regarding first principles of right reason and other self-evident first truths

We live in a post-modern [actually, ultra-modern . . . in Joe Carter's sense of "modernity on volume level ELEVEN, not merely  ten" . . . ] world, or so we are commonly told. In that world, it is a commonplace to hear that “Aristotelian logic” exhibits a black- and- white thinking fallacy (strawman: any […] more

RDF/AIG as a case of the incoherence and rhetorical agenda of evolutionary materialist thought and/or its fellow- traveller ideologies

For the past several weeks, there has been an exchange that developed in the eduction vs persuasion thread (put up May 9th by AndyJones), on first principles of right reason and related matters.  Commenter RDF . . .   has championed some popular talking points in today’s intellectual culture. We can therefore pick up from a […] more

REFERENCE: The Smith Model, an architecture for cybernetics and mind-body/ free will/ determinism/ compatibilism analysis . . .

Since the issue of agent freedom and cause has again come up, it is worth the while to post the following summary on the Smith Model for agent cause and cybernetics, from the IOSE unit on minds etc: __________ >>(c) Of neurons, brains and minds The neuron (in its various types) is the key building […] more

They said it dept: ID objector JLA inadvertently underscores the absurd logical/worldview consequences of evolutionary materialism . . . QED

One of our frequent objectors, JLA, has listed the consequences of evolutionary materialism, by way of objecting to BA’s further reply to the current crop of remarks at TSZ. (NB: I at first thought he might be being satirical, but, sadly, he is actually playing a straight hand. {Let me make this plain: FULL MARKS […] more

TSZ explodes in anger and mischaracterisations over BA’s recent post at UD: “If My Eyes Are a Window, Is There Anyone Looking Out?”

(In case you think this is about a strawman, cf. here) A few days ago UD President, BA, posted on the topic, “If My Eyes Are a Window, Is There Anyone Looking Out?” Reaction at objecting blog TSZ has been explosive. For just one instance — a slice of the cake reveals its ingredients, we […] more

The ghost of William Paley says his piece in reply to Darwin and successors, on the commonly dismissed “watch found in the field” argument

Over at the KF blog, we have recently been entertaining some ghosts from our civilisation’s past, who are concerned about its present and now sadly likely future in light of the sad history recorded in Acts 27, of a sea voyage to Rome gone disastrously wrong because the voyagers were manipulated into venturing back out […] more

FOR RECORD: In response to EL’s attempt to dismiss the invidiousness of “both the Nazis and KF think that . . .”

UPDATE: Sometimes, it is needful to drive home a point, even when it is on an unpleasant matter and deals with uncivil conduct. For, unchecked incivility, willful disregard for the truth and fairness, and associated enabling behaviour are patently destructive. [For those who need help here, methinks the ghost of Pilate has somewhat to say […] more

FOR RECORD: A further corrective note to Dr EL of TSZ

The management of TSZ leaves me little alternative but to publish a corrective publicly. I see where TSZ continues to host the following long since corrected assertion: Kairosfocus, this is outrageous.  Nobody here, to my knowledge, has suggested that you are a Nazi, and I certainly have not. This is false and should be known […] more

Journal of Medical Ethics, the ghosts of Francis Schaeffer and C Everett Koop have somewhat to say to you regarding “post-birth abortion” . . .

(In case you imagine this to be purely academic, cf. here) UD News has recently highlighted a  debate on how the academy has reacted to objections to a bioethics paper that advocated “post-birth abortion.” (Cf. a noteworthy objection, here.) Including, “post-birth abortion” of the healthy but undesirable. A telling clip from the JME paper: we […] more

Academics: Don’t you dare let the public know what we are talking about!

One characteristic of corruption in academic life is the desire to shut both intelligent lay people and the practitioners of other disciplines out of discussions that must concern them. more

A corrective to some remarks regarding first principles of reason, showing that such first principles are just that . . .

It seems I need to headline a corrective footnote on basic reasoning, from an ongoing exchange in a current discussion thread: ________ >> I decided to take a look around via Google. It was saddening but unsurprising to see the party-spirited objections to first principles of reason coming from the circle of objector sites. Inadvertently, they […] more

Video: Dr George Yancey documents progressivist anti-Christian and partisan biases in the university and even in IQ tests . . . with implications for addressing the commonly encountered “ID is Creationism in a cheap tuxedo” smear

Yesterday, I ran across the video to be shown below and posted a comment that I think needs to be headlined and seriously pondered if we are concerned that the university functions in an objective, fair-minded, truth-seeking way: This study (HT: WK) as presented in a short lecture by Dr George Yancey — a sociologist […] more

Dr Yancey’s  IQ test questions (strictly: fallacy-detection questions, evidently used by some to claim that Christians are less intelligent than secularist progressives and fellow travellers) are especially revealing of how biases are embedded in what is deemed “knowledge” and “logical-thinking ability” that is then used to assess “intelligence” . . . as in, you Fundies and fellow travellers are dumb, ignorant, follow outdated myths and are unable to spot basic errors in reasoning:


Dr Yancey’s contrast of culturally/worldview loaded “IQ” questions and biases, the second bloc being taken from a researcher who seems to have suggested inferior intelligence for Christians


Examples coming from the other researcher. Notice the ambiguities in the word, “prove” and related, probably inadvertent biases. (And yes, BA77, the Shroud of Turin example is problematic at another level, as there is indeed a question about that C-14 medieval date; but that is not commonly understood. Which raises a question about conventional wisdom driven by institutionally dominant views (thus also politics) vs genuine warrant. And yes, this gap between conventional views shaped by institutional dominance and genuine objective warrant is directly relevant to design theory issues.)

These findings raise significant questions, and they raise the very important issue of the gap between conventional wisdom and genuine warrant on the merits.

Worse, when an institution has dominant factions, who imagine they have cornered the market on intelligence and knowledge, and which hold power to enforce their views, that can lead to serious bias and worse. Which points back to the significance of many gaps in surveys of Christian/Secularist/ etc. participation in key institutions of influence across our civilisation.

Such also highlights the pattern of adverse perceptions among academic Departments in the US, a leading, trend-setting nation in our civilisation:


The band of peak bias, showing a strong sense of hostility to Bible-believing Christians. In other results presented, this is shown to hold even when corrected for perceived/actual political affiliations. That is this bias is over and above the known tendency of College Faculty to be left-leaning

Yancey has shown a clear, dominant pattern, consistent with other results.

So strong is this that it raises the issue that reformation is indicated, but will obviously be stoutly resisted within existing institutions. So, alternative institutions will have to be created and/or political/court interventions made to correct ideological bias; which is going to be even more controversial.

Such in turn raises the whole agenda of the commonly seen tactic of marginalisation and denigratory, bias-driven dismissive and prejudicial stereotyping.  (“Ignorant, stupid, insane . . . or wicked.”)

In applying the issue of bias to the design controversy, and the “Design theorists are creationists in cheap tuxedos” smear, it is obvious that the smear is cleverly designed with much malice aforethought to appeal to entrenched bias, and to reinforce it. That is why it is likely to be and remain ideologically effective. Never mind, that there is good reason to see it as factually unwarranted, as the just linked highlights in a nutshell.

However, accepting such biased stereotypes and seemingly obviously true smears may come at a stiff price, intellectual integrity.

That will doubtless be hotly denied and instantly dismissed in many quarters.

Not so fast, pahdnuh.

The following list of questions on just how well warranted (or, not) the typical evolutionary materialism-driven, secularism reinforcing views just exposed are, will be indicative:

1] Your empirically grounded evidence that blind chance and mechanical necessity are plausibly adequate to form a life friendly cosmos, trigger OOL and then body plans (including our own with the crucial linguistic ability) is: ______________ ? [Cf. here on.]

2] Your empirically grounded evidence that things like FSCO/I are not empirically tested, found reliable indicators of design is: ____________ ?

3] Your adequate reason for dismissing the reality of God . . .  is: ___________ ? [Cf. here.]

4] In that context [of evident evolutionary materialism], your grounding of the credibility of the human ability to reason and know (note here onlookers) is: ______________ ?

5] In that context, your grounding of OUGHT in an IS at worldview foundation level adequate to sustain rights as more than the nihilistic, amoral “might and manipulation make ‘right’ . . . ” warned against by Plato in The Laws, Bk X, is: _______________ ? [Onlookers, cf. here, here and here for why this is absolutely important.)

6] Your best explanation for the minimal facts at the historical foundation of the Christian Faith is: _____________, and it is best warranted as ____________ ?

7] In light of the above, your best account for the system of reality we see in the world around us and in our hearts is: ______________, and it is best warranted as a worldview because ____________ ?

We need to ask and seriously probe answers to such, if we are to move to a sounder, less biased footing.

And, resistance to or evasion of such an agenda of questions, is itself a highly revealing indicator of what is going on.

We have our work cut out for us as a civilisation at risk. END