神創論/智慧設計論者的策略 Common Tactics by Creationists/ID Proponents

引言

編寫這文章﹐目的是綜合我們所見的種種神創論者/智慧設計論者的詭辯方法。他們這些方法很容易令科學的門外漢信服。

詭辯一 ﹕把科學的定義模糊化﹐或者曲解科學的定義誤導人

例子包括﹐那62位“科學家﹑教育工作者﹑專業人士”和 Dr. Pauline CHIU的意見書。前者不提科學是用自然的解釋去說明自然現象﹑拒絕超自然因素的部份﹐後者就不提科學的證偽和驗證方法。

美國的 Michael Behe﹐就只強調證據﹑觀察﹑和邏輯推論﹐而不提及證偽和驗證假說。這些話是他在美國賓夕法尼亞州多佛鎮2005年那次有關智慧設計論在公學教導的聆訊上﹑宣誓後說的。

Philip Johnson 詹腓力就說科學是一堆教條。

Steve Fuller 就說科學過去曾經接納超自然﹐而不提啟蒙時代開始﹐科學已經擯棄超自然。

詭辯二 ﹕把支持進化論的名人的言論(說話﹐著作) 斷章取義

達爾文﹑Stephen Jay Gould﹑Eugenie Scott﹐都曾經給神創論者/智慧設計論者對他們的說話斷章取義。

達爾文著作“物種起源”談到進化論的難明白點﹐但他有在後面解釋﹐往往就給神創論者/智慧設計論者曲解為他自己不信進化論。部份匪夷所思的傳言還說他臨死後悔發表進化論。

Stephen Jay Gould 介紹“寒武紀大爆發”時候﹐說這是進化論難解的謎﹐他有在同一本書解釋﹐又是給神創論者/智慧設計論者曲解。

Eugenie Scott ( NCSE 總監) 在一次訪問給一些不透露背景的人訪問﹐說她也對進化論有保留。

他們連美國科學院出版社的“科學﹑進化論與神創論”有關科學的定義也膽敢斷章取義。

詭辯三 ﹕睜大眼睛說謊﹑不盡不實

美國賓夕法尼亞州多佛鎮2005年那次有關智慧設計論在公學教導的聆訊上﹐辯方﹐即替那些想把智慧設計引入公校的學校委員會辯護的律師﹐說智慧設計論是“科學理論”。我們 Facebook 遇見某教授的公子也是這麼說。Discovery Institute 宣揚智慧設計論是足夠挑戰進化論﹗

Dr. Pauline Chiu 一字不提智慧設計論裡面的超自然解釋﹑也不提支持進化論證據汗牛充棟。

62位“科學家﹑教育工作者﹑專業人士”說簽署“達爾文異議”的750人都是“高資歷科學家”也是他們謊言之一。

詭辯四 ﹕打稻草人

捏造大量曲解進化論的事實﹐然後攻擊之。例如說進化論是信仰﹑進化論鼓勵弱肉強食﹑進化論說生命隨機進化﹑進化的突變都是有害﹑或者如果人和動物沒有分別﹐人就道德淪亡。

事實上﹐動物的情感﹑同理能力﹑親情和人都類似﹐動物不是無情殘酷的。

他們也說科學家宣傳“進化論是唯一被許可的解釋”﹐企圖把科學家描繪為教條化﹑殭化的人。科學家只是說進化論是目前唯一最佳﹑最多支持﹑最合理﹑通過了各種考驗的解釋。

詭辯五﹕訴諸群眾

他們會說有“很多科學家反對進化論”﹐但科學不是訴諸多數的。

詭辯六﹕教導“爭議”﹐開放討論

把開放討論等同開放討論任何東西﹑不理會該論述是否合理﹑真實﹑或者無聊﹐把所有東西的質素都當是平等的﹐然後指那些對其他學說抱懷疑者是教條主義﹑狹隘。

詭辯七﹕幾個偽造化石推翻進化論

他們最喜歡引用皮爾登人 Piltdown Man﹑奈布拉斯加人 Nebraska Man﹑中國始祖鳥化石﹐說這些化石都是偽造﹐等於推翻進化論﹐等於科學不可靠。

進化論不是靠幾個化石支持的﹐此外﹐幾件偽造化石都是科學界自己發現﹑自己糾正的﹐這證明科學的自行改正能力。此外這些偽造化石最多是不能夠作為支持進化論的證據﹐而不是推翻的證據﹐

除非發現一個自然的例子﹑化石的證據﹐和進化論論述還有矛盾才算推翻。

Introduction

This article summarizes all kinds of fallacious argument put forward by Creationists/ID Proponents in the attempt to persuade general public who are not familiar with science.

Fallacious argument 1 - loosen the meaning of science or misrpresent it

The letter by the 62 "educators, scientists and professions" and Dr. Pauline CHIU are fine specimens of this tactics. The former misrepresent science by claiming it is friendlty to religious notions, and left out the part that science seeks natural explanations and reject supernatural. The latter just left out the part of science about testing hypothesis and falsification.

Michael Behe, on his testimony under oath at the Dover Pennsylvania trial in 2005 did the same. He emphasis only empirical evidence, observation and logical inferences.

Philip Johnson claims that science is a set of dogmas. Steve Fuller claims science has in the past used supernatural ideas (but then after the Enlightenment, these are discarded.)

Fallacious argument 2 - quote mining

Famous scientists who supported evolution all their lives were targets of quotemining.

Darwin's book "Origin of Species" have a section where Darwin listed out the difficult parts facing his ideas, and he went on answering them in the same book. Creationists/Intellligent Design proponents just quoted that part. Some went as far as saying Darwin confessed at his death bed that he regretted ever publishing his work on evolution!

Stephen Jay Gould remarked that the Cambrian period where species proliferated is an "enigma". Yet he actually provided an explanation to it. Of course the Creationists/Intellligent Design proponents just pick that part they liked.

Eugenie Scott, director of NCSE was interviewed by a group of ID proponents, and made some remarks about evolution which was later used in an ID film to claim she also doubted evolution.

The 62 "educators, scientsists and professions" even dare to quote mine National Academy Press' "Science, evolution and creationism" - quoting the defintion of science selectively.

Fallacious argument 3 - downright lying or withholding facts

The defense lawyers at Dover trial claimed Intelligent Design is a "scientific theory", one of the visitor at Facebook (son of some professor).

Dr. Pauline Chiu said nothing about the fact the Intelligent Design embraces supernatural causes, and said nothing about the overwhelminng, non-refuttable evidences in support of evolution.

Of course the 62 "educators, scientsists and professions" claimed the 750 people in the list of Dissent from Darwinism are "highly qualified scientiosts" were among those outrageous lies.

Fallacious argument 4 - Strawman

Making a lot of false assertions about evolution, such as saying it is as religion, it purported the notion of the strong dominating the weak, or that evolution is a random process. Some says mutations that produces variations are all harmful or that if human evolved from animal people will loose moral values (yet animals display emphay, love to their offsprings and even altruism).

Some also said scientists say "evolution is the only allowable explanation" to portray scientists as being dogmatic. Scientists merely say evolution is at present the best, well supported, well tested explanation to biodiversity.

Fallacious argument 5 - Argumentum ad populum

They tried to make the debate a matter of popular vote, but in fact the matter of science is to be settled by scientific methods.

Fallacious argumen 6 - Teach the "controversy", open discussion

This assumed a priori that all arguments or ideas are equal and does not have to be subjected to skepticism. To those who expressed skepticism, they accused them of narrow-minded or dogmatic.

Fallacious argumen 7 - fake fossils proves evolution is wrong

They like to quote Piltdown Man, Nebraska man and the Archeoptreux fossil of China, all three were mistaken or downright forgery, and by this they claim evolution, or even science is wrong.

In fact all three cases were detected by scientific community and corrected by them. If they prove anything, they prove that science has the capabiltiy of finding its own mistake and correct it, and advance.

Moreover, no science will rely on a few evidences, the mistaken ones at best are only non-evidence, not evidences that overturn the theory.