[WikiEN-l] The creationists are coming ..

[Sage Ross]

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.  The main issue is the choice of which sources are
considered significant/reliable enough to be included, since there is
a wealth of potential sources for each side.  Many of the
anti-intelligent design sources I would consider of dubious
objectivity, even though I agree with their objectives to prevent the
political aspects of the ID Movement from gaining power in the
educational system (as well as their conclusion that ID is no serious
competition to evolutionary theory).  In particular, Mark Perakh,
Forrest & Gross, and Eugenie Scott (among others) are polemicists
whose work responds to the political and ideological aspects of ID and
does not attempt to engage seriously with the (limited but real)
intellectual aspects.

The other problem is the intractable one of which aspects to emphasize
and which not to. I've occasionally tried to insert material about the
diversity of thought within the ID movement and among those who study
it, but it generally gets removed as not significant (which I believe
from personal experience not to be the case, but haven't seen any real
evidence one way or the other).

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.

-Ragesoss

On 9/7/06, Alphax (Wikipedia email) <alphasigmax at gmail.com> wrote:
> Erik Moeller wrote:
> > .. and they're going to spam our e-mail queue:
> > http://www.evolutionnews.org/2006/09/wikipedia_youre_on_notice.html
> >
> > It would be nice to get some evolutionary biologists to review our
> > entries on the respective topics systematically. I suspect there's
> > probably a lot of creationist POV creep already.
>
> It would also be nice to get some creationists to review our entries on
> Creatonism and Intelligent Design systematically; I suspect there's a
> lot of evolutionist POV creep.
>
> --
> Alphax - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax
> Contributor to Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
> "We make the internet not suck" - Jimbo Wales
> Public key: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax/OpenPGP
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
>
>
>