ID the Future Intelligent Design, Evolution, and Science Podcast
Topic

physicalism

RGH cover no text

Pt. 4: Stephen Meyer and Skeptic Michael Shermer

This ID the Future wraps up a lively four-part series between religious skeptic Michael Shermer and Return of the God Hypothesis author and philosopher of science Stephen Meyer. Here Meyer underscores the fact that every worldview must posit something as the prime reality, and he argues that positing mind (rather than matter) as the prime reality solves far more problems in science, and not just in origins science. What about the idea of a multiverse to explain the fine tuning of the laws and constants of physics? Meyer concedes that this is a solution of sorts, but it comes at a tremendous cost, which he explains. That’s just a taste of where Meyer and Shermer go in this final segment. Read More ›

IDTF-thumbnail
IDTF-thumbnail

Aeschliman on Three Great Authors Critiquing Scientism

On this episode of ID the Future, Andrew McDiarmid concludes his two-part conversations with Michael Aeschliman, author of the newly revised and expanded The Restoration of Man: C. S. Lewis and the Continuing Case Against Scientism. Here Aeschliman places Lewis among a strong line of thinkers critiquing scientism, including the philosopher/mathematician Blaise Pascal, who showed that scientific knowledge on its own could never be sufficient for being fully human; the theologian and physicist Stanley L. Jaki, who brilliantly integrated science and theology; and the great English author Jonathan Swift, whose satirical work skewered the illusions of scientific reductionism.

Read More ›
The-Human-Advantage

Jay Richards’ The Human Advantage: Machines Aren’t Us, and They Aren’t Replacing Us, Either

On this episode of ID the Future, Robert Crowther talks with author Jay Richards about Richards’ new book The Human Advantage: The Future of American Work in an Age of Smart Machines. Science fiction tantalizes us — and pundits terrorize us — with images of  intelligent machines taking over for humans. Really taking over, as in replacing us. Some thinkers even say that’s just the next phase, since we’re machines ourselves. Jay Richards explains how that’s wrong, and there’s a lot more to hope for than to fear in our future with our new smart machines.

Read More ›