... my opinions on the whole "science and religion" hullabaloo which has made the rounds across many blogs lately, most notably (by me at least) on the blogs of Chris Mooney and Jerry Coyne. I've tried to follow the main players as much as I could. This of course means I've completely ignored the hanger-ons, the ones who can be likened to those annoying kids who would shout "Yeah dude, take that!" after someone else did all the hard work (be it providing a beat down, insult, what have you). I always wondered what it took to become a well known science blogger, and after reading some of the tripe across the net lately, I've decided that it doesn't take much. Probably just kissing enough of the right posteriors. Anyways, look for the entry to be finished in the next few days. I'm trying to equally offend both sides of the issue, so I want to get enough sources* together to ensure I do it justice.
*I'm going to do some serious Richard Dawkins scholarship here. I'm looking up as many websites as I can.
Thursday, July 02, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
2 comments:
Just seen this, so a belated suggestion that if you're going to read Dawkins with a view to arguing against the man or what he has (apparently) come to represent... try something like the Blind Watchmaker, which I think is a good example of how he used to be less annoying, and has him arguing for as opposed to against. What little I've read of the God Delusion seems much crasser and leaden, though I'm guessing it is based on the same core beliefs.
If you don't mind secondary/tertiary sources, Andrew Brown's "The Darwin Wars" is a nice primer on some of the shouting past each other that has gone on, though it needs to be taken with a pinch of salt and awareness of the author's own (dis)inclincations.
Thanks for the resources. As I've thought more about this particular entry, I think I'm going to change course. A further devolution of the topic (which is where I was inclined to go) won't help anything.
Post a Comment