Official retirement from intelligent design

[Ophiolite]

In trying to track down information on William Dembski's dissertation for a PhD at the University of Illinois at Chicago I ran across this.

It's an announcement that he is officially retiring from ID. It's a short announcement, but here is an even shorter extract that contains the gist of it.
"......I really am retired from ID. I no longer work in the area. Moreover, the camaraderie I once experienced with colleagues and friends in the movement has largely dwindled.

I’m not talking about any falling out. It’s simply that my life and interests have moved on. It’s as though ID was a season of my life and that season has passed. Earlier this month (September 10, 2016) I therefore resigned my formal associations with the ID community, including my Discovery Institute fellowship of 20 years."

I'm somewhat bemused by this. How can you retire from a hypothesis. I cannot imagine, for example, Richard Dawkins announcing he had "retired from evolution". For me, the concept makes no sense. Two possibilities occur to me:

• He actually meant to say "I have retired from ID research". But to declare that "his life and interests have moved on", carries a sense that he no longer values ID. A retired biologist, at one time active in evolutionary studies would not normally, I think, abandon his belief in the importance of evolution.
• You cannot retire from a theory, but you can retire from a political party, or an agenda driven organisation, such as the Discovery Institute. Is this Dembski, admitting via sub-text, that ID is creationism in disguise?

Or, is there is some other explanation, hopefully more plausible than my two suggestions?

 

[AV1611VET]

Or, is there is some other explanation, hopefully more plausible than my two suggestions?

He's saying, "I don't dig ID no more."

 

[USincognito]

1. To be fair, ID is described as an "inference" not a theory.

2. Fascinating find! I can't wait to see if there's more to this story.

 

[joshua 1 9]

carries a sense that he no longer values ID.

It means that he can no longer defend his theory. Even though it is based on William Paley.

 

[Speedwell]

It means that he can no longer defend his theory. Even though it is based on William Paley.

Not "even though," but because. William Paley's premise was faulty from the get-go.

 

[essentialsaltes]

A few weeks before the official announcement, Dembski did an interview with Sean McDowell, a Christian apologist and co-author of a 2008 book on ID with Dembski (and son of Josh). It sheds a little more light.

With regard to my research, it has shifted quite a bit these days. I’m largely retired from intelligent design. My last serious writing effort on intelligent design was my 2014 book Being as Communion: A Metaphysics of Information. It encapsulates my two decades work on intelligent design, and I’m not sure I have a whole lot more to add.

I would say that we have by far the better argument. ... So we may have truth on our side, but we’re still largely marginalized.

So he's clearly not repudiating ID. Just going to work on something more productive, I suppose. He faults 'the church' for not being particularly supportive of ID. Either it's theistic evolutionists with no need for ID, or YEC with no need for ID.

The Noah’s Ark theme park in Kentucky is a case in point. What an embarrassment and waste of money. I’ve recently addressed the fundamentalism that I hold responsible for this sorry state of affairs.

 

[pitabread]

I'd heard that Dembski was not longer activity involved in the ID movement, but didn't know he'd officially released a 'retirement' statement.

Interesting, thanks for posting this.

 

[Ophiolite]

1. To be fair, ID is described as an "inference" not a theory..

Fair point. I introduced it as a hypothesis, but then later got sloppy and called it a theory. (If it were a theory we could dismiss it, since it would only be a theory. )

 

[pitabread]

So he's clearly not repudiating ID. Just going to work on something more productive, I suppose. He faults 'the church' for not being particularly supportive of ID. Either it's theistic evolutionists with no need for ID, or YEC with no need for ID.

The Noah’s Ark theme park in Kentucky is a case in point. What an embarrassment and waste of money. I’ve recently addressed the fundamentalism that I hold responsible for this sorry state of affairs.

IDists and YECs always struck me as strange-bedfellows. YECs did seem overly eager to glom onto the ID movement as their best chance to combating evolution in the schools. Interesting that they seem to have largely abandoned that, at least per Dembski's view.

 

[Ophiolite]

A few weeks before the official announcement, Dembski did an interview with Sean McDowell, a Christian apologist and co-author of a 2008 book on ID with Dembski (and son of Josh). It sheds a little more light.

With regard to my research, it has shifted quite a bit these days. I’m largely retired from intelligent design. My last serious writing effort on intelligent design was my 2014 book Being as Communion: A Metaphysics of Information. It encapsulates my two decades work on intelligent design, and I’m not sure I have a whole lot more to add.

I would say that we have by far the better argument. ... So we may have truth on our side, but we’re still largely marginalized.

So he's clearly not repudiating ID. Just going to work on something more productive, I suppose. He faults 'the church' for not being particularly supportive of ID. Either it's theistic evolutionists with no need for ID, or YEC with no need for ID.

The Noah’s Ark theme park in Kentucky is a case in point. What an embarrassment and waste of money. I’ve recently addressed the fundamentalism that I hold responsible for this sorry state of affairs.

Good information. The interview is mentioned in the link I provided, but I hadn't attempted to locate it - too focused on finding his original dissertation.

His remarks sound reasonable and speak well as to the sincerity of his approach, if not the good sense.

 

[AV1611VET]

I'd heard that Dembski was not longer activity involved in the ID movement, but didn't know he'd officially released a 'retirement' statement.

Interesting, thanks for posting this.

ID is a joke.

 

[AV1611VET]

Fair point. I introduced it as a hypothesis, but then later got sloppy and called it a theory. (If it were a theory we could dismiss it, since it would only be a theory. )

ID is a joke.

 

[tas8831]

The Noah’s Ark theme park in Kentucky is a case in point. What an embarrassment and waste of money. I’ve recently addressed the fundamentalism that I hold responsible for this sorry state of affairs.

Finally - something that I actually agree with Dembski about!

 

[HitchSlap]

ID is a joke.

This may be one of the only times I can recall, where we agree.