Comments on: Creationism’s Trojan Horse: The Wedge of Intelligent Design

By: TPain

TPain — Sun, 09 Mar 2008 11:44:47 +0000

TristeroYou are correct that the Wedge Strategy comes from the counter-enlightenment tradition, at least from the originators. But I was commenting on why it has gotten so much traction now. We have become a populace primed to doubt knowledge and the basis for knowing anything so a creationist tale is as good as an evidence based description. The origin of the ID story is classic counter-enlightenment, but it is dressed in the garb of post-modernism for a country steeped in the internet and the “all information is equal” fallacy.

By: evogirl

evogirl — Sun, 09 Mar 2008 10:02:16 +0000

A fine companion to this terrific book is the recently released 'Icons of Evolution' (Greenwood, 2008) (no not the anti-evolution one!). This two volume set has 24 chapters written by some of the best known and respected evolutionists, historians and philosophers of the topic. It has a really good chapter on the history of Intelligent Design. It totally puts the other book by the same name in the ground!UPDATE: See this.

By: tristero

tristero — Sun, 09 Mar 2008 09:11:32 +0000

I agree. Creationism’s Trojan Horse is essential to understanding the “intelligent design” creationism movement, especially its funding and tactics.The Wedge Strategy is not really an example of “post modernist thought styles” but rather a contemporary update to pre-modernist appeals to the fallacy of unquestioned authority. The strategy depends upon a rarely noticed pun.The Wedge document, and its acolytes, make a point of disparaging “materialism” by which they equate the intellectual meaning (the universe is made up of matter, period) with the colloquial (materialism is a philosophy of greed and vulgar obsession with objects and money). By conflating the two and linking scientific “materialism” with greed, the people behind the Wedge claim (wrongly) to offer an alternative, a universe filled with meaning and absolutes.This is hardly post-modernism. In fact, it is the antithesis of the postmodern stance, which asserts – roughly – that simplistic narratives of meaning and absolutes whose truth claims cannot be robustly questioned are highly suspect. Some, not all, postmodernists go further, claiming that meaning is always contingent and that the only absolute is the denial of the absolute.The Wedge-ites (“wedgies?”), insist that the innate morality of those supporting their position overrides any lies or distortions they might use to advance their cause. A postmodernist – heck, even anyone with a lick of a commonsense – will respond that the innate virtue of the speaker is a dubious criterion by which to judge the efficacy of that person’s scientific assertions.Postmodernism has many faults. And yes, the Wedge followers sometimes deploy a crude postmodernism when it suits their purpose (how can anyone really know what happened one billion years ago?). But “intelligent design” creationism’s anti-intellectualism has its roots in the counter-Enlightenment arguments of the royalists and the priests rather than in modern French theory.

By: TPain

TPain — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 12:58:58 +0000

The Wedge Strategy would appear to me to be a consequence of post-modernist thought styles. The denigration of expertise that has developed over the past 40-50 years. This is the shadow side of the more positive empowerment of individuals that is consequent with adopting this perspective.Certainly recognizing the elements of this strategy is the first step in defeating it. Sometimes we need to act against our natural instinct to doubt “common knowledge” or the consensus of experts. Meta is where it’s at.