Re: Priviledged Planet--film & book

From: Rich Blinne <>
Date: Thu Jun 02 2005 - 09:11:37 EDT

Ted, did you get an invite? If so, I would be interested in a report who was
invited to this event. The issue with the Smithsonian is not that this is a
"creationist" movie, but that it is a attempted "wedge" event and Denyse's
implication that somehow the Smithsonian is warming to ID. To DI's credit
they never claimed that, only Denyse did. If DI had rented out an ordinary
auditorium and had it open to the public, there would be no controversy.
Furthermore, it would have a greater outreach effect. This only serves to
harden the "true believers" on both sides.

I agree with you commentary, but DI has done nothing to stop the guilt by
association. By DI having a big tent that includes YEC but not evolving
creationists they risk tarring more credible projects like The Priviledged
Planet. I feel sorry for your friends.

On 6/2/05, Ted Davis <> wrote:
> I have not yet seen the film version of "The Priviledged Planet," but I
> read
> the book with care and much interest last spring. I plan to attend the
> Smithsonian event and draw my own conclusions about the film. The only
> thing I know about the film in advance is, that it includes an interview
> with my colleague Robin Collins. Robin is one of the brightest people I
> know, a philosopher of science (his doctoral committee: Bas van Frassen,
> Arthur Fine, and Al Plantinga) who also has an ABD in the foundations of
> quantum mechanics (grad work at U Texas, some with John Wheeler). He's
> presently writing (among other things) a book on fine tuning; he's also
> writing a book on the atonement, since he has expertise in philosophy of
> religion as well. He and I (with David Foster) co-teach a large class
> every
> other fall term, "Issues in Science and Religion." We are planning to use
> the film in class this fall.
> As for the book, it is not a "creationist" book, unless we are using that
> term to include all members of the ASA--that is, religious people who
> believe that the universe is a purposeful divine creation.
> If (please note the use of the subjunctive here) the film is close to the
> book in content and tone, then it is simply not a creationist film. I
> share
> the suspicion that most of those who object to the film's showing at the
> Smithsonian, have done so according to the following "logic":
> (1) One of the authors of "The Priviledged Planet" is Jay Richards
> (2) Jay Richards works for The Discovery Institute
> (3) The Discovery Institute promotes "intelligent design"
> (4) "Intelligent design" is "creationism" in disguise
> (5) Therefore, "The Priviledged Planet" is a creationist book/film
> Now I've been blunt with my friends in the "intelligent design" movement.
> The fact that they are willing to jump into bed with genuine
> "creationists"
> in places like Kansas, does leave it open for their critics to charge them
> with being "creationists" pure and simple. But (4) is false, and so is
> (5).
> Even if (4) were true, (5) does not follow. I would be interested to hear
> from others who have read the book: do you agree with this commentary?
> Ted
Received on Thu Jun 2 09:13:58 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Jun 02 2005 - 09:13:59 EDT