Science Blogging

Posted on December 8, 2008
Filed Under Sideblog | 4 Comments

Great bloggingheads discussion between Abigail Smith and Ed Young up. The part I liked best was why they got into blogging and some of the discussion on whether one has to be a scientist to do science I may comment on later. I’d never really read ERV but I’m going to check it out. There’s also a new one up between Will Wilkinson and Paul Bloom on the ever popular “is Richard Dawkins giving atheists a bad name” discussion. (I’m listening to that right now)

Related posts:

  1. Decreasing Inequality Creates the Illusion of Inequality?
  2. Check Kids Homework
  3. Neuroscience and Evil
  4. Peirce Blog
  5. Film on Missouri War
  6. Davidson, Gadamer and Derrida

Comments

4 Responses to “Science Blogging”

Wilkinson and Bloom had a pretty interesting argument about the so-called “New Atheists.” That is by having some atheists out there who are so annoying that it makes more moderate atheists acceptable. The analogy they gave was how gay activists pushing for marriage made religious conservatives more apt to support things that gave the same rights as marriage with respect to hospitals and so forth.

It’s an interesting argument and I can see the value of that. However I notice that in religion that extreme religious people who are annoying don’t make the moderates among us more appealing to the mainstream that I can see.

But Clark, moderate religious people are the mainstream (or maybe we have different ideas of what constitutes religious moderates). What are the moderate items for the religious agenda that the mainstream is refusing to get on board with? I’m pretty sure the moderate religious position w/r/t science is the separate magisteria argument–which is, I think, the standard answer high school science teachers give.

Sorry, I was thinking about minority religions like ourselves.

There’s a terrific amount of knowledge in this aticrle!

Leave a Reply