Tuesday, December 05, 2006

I want to thank Doppelganger for introducing me to the Salem Hypothesis. It states that Creationists are much more likely to be engineers than scientists. Yes, this is true, but why? The Darwinist will most likely attribute this to a deficiency in science. As the engineer views his discipline more as Applied Science + Design, we tend to take a dim view of this attitude. The other possibility is that engineers are more likely to have a proper respect for Design than scientists and prefer a unified world view with design near the center. The Darwinist must necessarily have a split world view where Intelligent Design is mandatory in high-tech, but impossible in biology. It is a bit schizophrenic.

Doppelganger also introduced me to the Kruger-Dunning effect. This states that people of lower intelligence have a habit of making ignorant statements about the big things. If I recall correctly, Darwin didn't do too well in school ...

8 comments:

Anonymous said...

"The other possibility is that engineers are more likely to have a proper respect for Design than scientists and prefer a unified world view with design near the center. The Darwinist must necessarily have a split world view where Intelligent Design is mandatory in high-tech, but impossible in biology. It is a bit schizophrenic."

The only problem with this statement is the fact that biologists are scientists and are thus required to accept the evidence. They don't get to 'choose' a unified world view. Science only gets to base its conclusions on the evidence. Evidence of Intelligent Design in biological systems = 0. Science is investigating the universe as it is. Engineers wish to make the universe how they want. You're allowed to choose your engineering goal. Biological evolution is not a choice!

Looney said...

I believe that the "scientists" have declared that all evidence regarding the existence of Intelligent Design is invalid, because it violates Darwinism.

Anonymous said...

No, there is no evidence for Intelligent Design.

Analogies are not evidence.

Not in the real world, anyway.

Anonymous said...

You also mis-state both the Salem hypothesis and the Kruger-Dunning effect.

Guess what we scientists take a dim view of?

Looney said...

Which implies that unless you work at Intel, it is impossible to verify whether or not Intel microprossesors are intelligently design. Without seeing it directly, you have nothing but analogies to rely on for evidence!

Looney said...

"Guess what we scientists take a dim view of?"

A lack of respect.

Anonymous said...

Which implies that unless you work at Intel, it is impossible to verify whether or not Intel microprossesors are intelligently design.



I have no doubt at all that computer chips are intelligently designed by humans. But I am not so silly and infantile in my thinking to extend that to mean that all 'complex' things must have been designed by some super Designer.

Without seeing it directly, you have nothing but analogies to rely on for evidence!

If you had any working knowledge of science - or reality for that matter - you would see how dumb that statement is.

Anonymous said...

"Guess what we scientists take a dim view of?"

A lack of respect.



No - people that pontificate on matters they are ignroant of.

We get plenty of respect from people that actually understand what we do.