Beckwith on ID

I’ve had reason to discuss Francis Beckwith before. Now over at the BioLogos website, he presents a two part statement of the philosophical weakness of core ID arguments. I haven’t had a chance to read this yet, but am passing the links on none-the-less. I expect a fulmination from Dembski …


3 thoughts on “Beckwith on ID

  1. Based on a quick skim, Beckwith says “I didn’t really understand that ID couldn’t get around God of the Gaps”.

    At least he’s honest enough to admit he didn’t understand ID.

  2. Beckwith: “The IDer thinks he can fill the gaps with intelligent agents; the atheist sees no reason to abandon fruitful theories because of a few anomalies he thinks he can someday account for.”

    Well, I think it’s more, like, the atheist doesn’t see any reason why “God” automatically wins by default every time there’s an “anomaly”.

    And since Beckwith refers to the “god of the gaps” concept several times in his article, one has to wonder WTF he’s still all confused about atheists and gods of the gaps. (Presumably it’s because he has to tell himself a bunch of confusing BS all the time to make himself believe all the dumb crap he believes, but I’m only guessing, of course.)

  3. Physicists are searching for the “creator”; they call it the Higgs boson. Evolution came later. To say evolution is not intelligent or lacks design is to deny recent discoveries of microbiology and astrophysics. Before you reject ID entirely, read the 40 books on psychology, biology and physics in the bibliographies of my e-book at If we were to completely dismiss that which we didn’t understand, progress in science and technology would come to a halt. It is the mysteries of life that drive researchers onward.

Comments are closed.