Uncommon Dissent

Tuesday, November 15, 2005

Noam Chomsky — If your taste for iconoclasm extends only so far (0 comments)

Let us fisk.

The following conflation of intelligent design and global warming is unworthy of Chomsky the scholar (as opposed to Chomsky the activist).

Unworthy? Mr. Street Theater can declare what is intellectually unworthy? This is not irony, but mercury. Dembski slips and slides from from derisiveness to derision with blobbish facility.

Chomsky uncritically takes as the definition of ID what he has read in the popular press.

It's equally likely that Chomsky agrees with that definition because he can see through bullshit. The popular press is not always wrong.

It might interest readers of this blog to know that I hold in my files a note (dated February 26, 1997) from Chomsky on MIT stationery commeting favorably on one of my early papers on information and ID (namely, “Intelligent Design as a Theory of Information” — which ultimately became chapters 3 and 4 of No Free Lunch).

Oh, yes, back when you had a shred of intellectual credibility, before you turned into the puppet-master. It's hardly inconsistent to abjure ID's latest moronitude.

Chomsky in his private moments has in fact been a critic of evolutionary theory, a fact reflected in Daniel Dennett’s criticisms of Chomsky in Darwin’s Dangerous Idea.

Proof positive that critics of evolution aren't automatic friends of intelligent design, an equivocation Dembski has been trumpeting from day one.

Poor, poor Dembski. Even Chomsky has abandoned you.

Filed under: Unintelligent Delusion


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home