On 07/09/06, Sage Ross ragesoss@gmail.com wrote:
The intelligent design articles have never really been in a state where rational proponents of ID (they do exist) would agree that their views are represented neutrally, though I think they've been getting closer. I say this as a trained biochemist, a former supporter of intelligent design, and a historian of evolutionary biology in training.
Heh. Has saying this on the talk pages helped?
Fortunately, I think there are a couple of scholarly treatments of ID in the works from historians and social scientists (science studies scholars, broadly speaking) who are not primarily approaching the issue as part of the anti-ID movement. (The proceedings of this year's Terry Lectures at Yale, which will take place today and tomorrow and eventually be published, are one example.) This will make obtaining less inherently controversial sources considerably easier.
Excellent! (Personally, I suspect ID is best treated as a matter for sociology. Probably not abnormal psychology, but anyway.)
- d.