Home » Intelligent Design » Behe and McWhorter on Bloggingheads

Behe and McWhorter on Bloggingheads

August 26, 2009 Posted by Paul Nelson under Intelligent Design
32 Comments

Their chat is here.

I don’t think Bloggingheads science regulars Sean Carroll and Carl Zimmer (who complained publicly and behind the scenes about my Bloggingheads segment with Ron Numbers) are going to like this.

  • Delicious
  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • RSS Feed

32 Responses to Behe and McWhorter on Bloggingheads

1 2
  1. 31
    Clive HaydenAugust 28, 2009 at 3:09 pm

    Seversky,

    ——Argumentum ad verecundiam McWhorter is a linguist not a biologist. No doubt he is intelligent and well-read but his opinions do not carry the weight of someone who is a full-time professional researcher in the field.

    By this argument, nor do your opinions carry any weight, for you’re not a full-time professional researcher in the field. If McWhorter cannot critique evolution on the grounds of being unqualified, then neither can you defend or support it. I would say, probably, 95% of my comments here involve turning the mirror back on the commentor, and just letting them see that what they posit as an argument defeats their own argument, and thus, defeats themselves, and that is certainly not a valid way to make an argument against someone else.

  2. 32
    SeverskyAugust 29, 2009 at 5:56 pm

    Clive Hayden @ 31

    By this argument, nor do your opinions carry any weight, for you’re not a full-time professional researcher in the field. If McWhorter cannot critique evolution on the grounds of being unqualified, then neither can you defend or support it. I would say, probably, 95% of my comments here involve turning the mirror back on the commentor, and just letting them see that what they posit as an argument defeats their own argument, and thus, defeats themselves, and that is certainly not a valid way to make an argument against someone else.

    As you say, I am not a full-time professional researcher in this field and I make no claim to any special authority for my opinions but, like everyone else here, I believe I am entitled to express them.

    McWhorter was fully entitled to discuss whatever reservations he has about evolutionary theory. That was not the problem. The issue was over the implication in vjtorley’s comment that McWhorter’s doubts were a significant criticism of evolutionary theory. Had he expressed similar concerns about Chomsky’s theories in linguistics I would have had no objection. In biology, however, Behe, as a professional biochemist, is more of an authority,

    I also happen to think he was mistaken in having the video of the debate taken down. Even if he thought he had acquitted himself badly in the debate, he should have left it alone and made any corrections he felt were needed through other channels.

1 2

Leave a Reply