Where purpose and function meet
Benjamin Wiker, who was recently heard accusing Darwinists of being in panic over 'specified complexity', seems to continue his wishful thinking in this article in Crisis Magazine. There seems to be indeed a crisis but contrary to Wiker's suggestions, the crisis seems to be in the ID camp where ID's failure to deliver scientifically relevant contributions seems to have cause much confusion.
1 Comment
Brian Poindexter · 11 April 2004
The conflation of function and purpose is a hallmark of ID. Because of this notion, the IDer can argue that virtually anything that fits its environment is most likely designed. I find this to be an interesting parallel to the whole use of the term "specified" in "specified complexity". Whereas it is supposed mean a level of complexity that meets a certain criteria, the lay person sees the word "specified" and thinks that this means that someone has done the specifying- that there is a "specifier". I have always felt that the ID people full know that this misinterpretation will take place in their audience, but I've never read any cautionary language from any of them. Given their ad campaign-like approach to the public it is fully expected that they don't clear this up. In the advertisement world, begging the question is the hallmark of doing business.