Bubble Witch Saga 3 Industrial Deals Beauty Little FIres Everywhere STEM nav_sap_plcc_ascpsc New Album by Big & Rich PCB for Musical Instruments Starting at $39.99 Grocery Handmade Tote Bags Home Gift Guide Off to College Home Gift Guide Book a house cleaner for 2 or more hours on Amazon BradsStatus BradsStatus BradsStatus  Introducing Echo Show Introducing All-New Fire HD 10 with Alexa hands-free $149.99 Kindle Oasis, unlike any Kindle you've ever held Tailgating STEMClubToys17_gno

Behe gets it wrong with respect to Ken Miller's book

Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-5 of 5 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Jun 16, 2008, 3:58:54 PM PDT
[Deleted by Amazon on Oct 23, 2008, 4:32:21 PM PDT]

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 28, 2008, 10:39:50 AM PDT
W. Kerney says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 13, 2008, 9:47:27 AM PDT
[Deleted by Amazon on Oct 23, 2008, 4:33:13 PM PDT]

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 4, 2009, 9:08:12 AM PDT
Alxsteele says:
Dear Mr. Kerney,

I find of great interest Taleb's book. Particularly his propensity to self-contradiction. His critical thinking with regard to creationists (as noted on pages 117-118) are actually logical tautologies. That is-they cannot be proven because whatever solution, evidence, or absence of evidence, in essence "proves" the premise.

I take particular interest in Taleb's discussion on creation as it applies to the issue of inadvertent discoveries. His examples are, ironically, human. If his theories of predictability hold up universally-and if he were to subject this premise to the same rigor as his narrative fallacy (testing the "narrative" of his being from Lebanon and a non-Protestant culture, on page 63-64)-he should look to other non-cognitive, non-reasoning species. Look beyond humans for a moment-where is Taleb's evidence that the accident of significant discovery resides as an accident for monkeys, turtles, bison, snails, fish, and tadpoles? Where is the inadvertent discovery of such species, the equivalent of a computer, or CD player? The main, unexplained aspect of his defense is that it begins with "intelligence"-his own.

Or, if I might be so bold as to apply his own rationality, his own intelligence in the sampling is a bias that prevents him discovering and proving his theory. Again, a tautology. Taleb may well "find" evidence of inadvertent discoveries-but they are such to him. To his intelligence and cognition, or even to the rest of humanity. Here we either accept our presence within the system (and despite that, our evaluation as qualitatively valid), or else we need the presence of external observation and declaration in order to reliably support our premises. Premises, I must remind us, that originate within the cognition of our own intelligence.

For consideration,


In reply to an earlier post on Jun 26, 2009, 6:18:32 PM PDT
[Deleted by Amazon on Jan 19, 2010, 2:44:58 PM PST]
‹ Previous 1 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in


This discussion

Participants:  4
Total posts:  5
Initial post:  Jun 16, 2008
Latest post:  Jun 26, 2009

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 1 customer

This discussion is about