Bill Hamilton writes:
>The flip side of this is that creationists have used Popper's attack on
>natural selection as an argument from authority. So it might reasonably be
>claimed that Popper's recantation is simply a fact that knocks a hole in
>the creationist "Popper says evolution isn't science" argument. In other
>words it's not an argument from authority, but an effort to lay one to
>rest.
Nicely and succinctly stated. It's the same point Brian Harper has been
making. Using one authority to counter another authority -- Popper versus
himself.
But it doesn't just "knock a hole" in the creationists' argument. It
doesn't cancel their argument and leave a null. It's not that benign, and
Bill and Brian are wrong to pretend it is. The recantation issue is fully
an argument from authority about the status of evolutionary theory.
Moreover, in practice, what counts is how the issues are presented to the
*public*. That is what counts. And in the public arena evolutionists use
Popper's authority to lend legitimacy to their theory. That is what they
do, there is no getting around it. It's an argument from authority.
The entire Popper affair is an important point in the creation/evolution
debate, and one worth documenting. But the affair is not essential, and
many readers can do well without it. That is why my book handles it, out of
the way, in an appendix. That lends exactly the right perspective on the
issue.
Walter ReMine
P.O. Box 28006
Saint Paul, MN 28128