I keep seeing "brights" comment in the blogosphere that Intelligent Design is just another word for Creationism. After people explain the differences between the two and point them to web - links explicating the distinctions, they continue equating them -- as if no clarification were ever offered -- and even accuse ID'ers and Creationists of lying.
It seems that being an intellectual luminary these days means confusion over simple word definitions and an inability to conduct superficial research about the beliefs of those with whom one disagrees, with intellectual dishonesty thrown in for spice. Impressive.
Given the efforts made toward disabusing them of their false notions, we can't even give them the benefit of the doubt and assume ignorance. The problem is either stupidity or conscious deceit.
Saying that Intelligent Design is the same as Creationism is like saying that being religious is the same as being a Muslim. And it's just as untrue.
Can a person be Muslim without being religious? No, because a Muslim is, by definition, one who follows the religion of Islam. But can a person be religious without being Muslim? Of course, because we know that a plethora of other religions exist -- such as Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism, Obamism, etc.
Can a person be a Creationist without being a believer in Intelligent Design? No, because Creationism assumes an intelligent designer as its starting point. But can a person advocate Intelligent Design without being a Creationist? Yes, because acceptance of a designer says nothing about the nature of that designer. Perhaps aliens seeded Earth (panspermia). Creationism, on the other hand, conforms to the Christian worldview. Further, it assumes a literal or face - value view of scripture -- regarding Genesis in particular.
If being religious is the set, then Islam is the subset. If ID is the set, then Creationism is the subset. There's nothing complicated about it.
Those who won't acknowledge these simple differences are corrupters of the English language, and enemies of truth.
No comments:
Post a Comment