Podcasts

Podcasts

Discovery Institute Podcast

Why Science Needs a Scout Mindset

Jonathan McLatchie
April 10, 2024
Scout or soldier? When it comes to our opinions and beliefs, there's a bit of both in all of us. But which mindset is more beneficial? On this ID The Future, host Andrew McDiarmid welcomes Dr. Jonathan McLatchie to discuss the characteristics of a scout mindset and how it relates to the debate over evolution and the evidence for intelligent design. Get full show notes at idthefuture.com.

Meyer & Tour on New Critiques of Origin of Life Research

Stephen C. Meyer
April 10, 2024
On this ID The Future, we're pleased to share a new discussion between Dr. James Tour and Dr. Stephen Meyer about recent critiques of origin of life research published in the prestigious science journal Nature. The interview originally aired on The Science and Faith Podcast, hosted by Dr. Tour. We are grateful to Dr. Tour for permission to share this interview on ID The Future.

A Battle of Predictions: Junk DNA’s ‘Kuhnian’ Paradigm Shift

Casey Luskin
April 5, 2024
Prevailing scientific assumptions often die hard, especially when they fit so neatly into an evolutionary view of the development of life on earth. On this episode of ID The Future from the archive, Dr. Casey Luskin gives host Andrew McDiarmid the scoop on one of the biggest mistakes in science of our lifetime: the concept of "junk DNA." Even if you’ve already heard this episode, listen again, and then share it with a friend! The myth of junk DNA is a major example of why a Darwinian paradigm can slow the progress of science, while a design perspective can open up new avenues for research and discovery. Find additional show notes at idthefuture.com.

Mind Matters

Is Methodological Naturalism Necessary for Scientific Progress?

285
Robert J. Marks
April 4, 2024
In this episode, hosts Angus Menuge and Robert J. Marks conclude their three-part discussion with Dr. Robert Larmer about his chapter on methodological naturalism in the recent volume Minding the Brain. The trio argue that methodological naturalism is not the only viable approach in scientific inquiry and that it can be an obstruction to discovering the truth. They suggest that explanations should be based on how well they explain rather than being prescribed in advance. They also criticize the assumption that science requires the adoption of methodological naturalism, which guarantees that non-physical causes can never be recognized. Dr. Larmer proposes an alternative approach called methodological pluralism, which allows for a more open-minded and evidence-based exploration of

The State of Innovation and the Impact of AI

284
Robert J. Marks
March 28, 2024
In this episode, host Robert J. Marks discusses the state of innovation and the impact of AI with guest Jeffrey Funk, author of the book Technology Change and the Rise of New Industries. They discuss the hype around AI, the limitations of large language models like GPT-3, the slowing rate of innovation, the impact of Goodhart’s Law on academia, and the need for a shift in metrics and a focus on practical applications. They also touch on the role of universities and corporations in driving innovation and the need for cross-fertilization and collaboration. Overall, they express skepticism about the current state of AI and emphasize the importance of measuring success based on real-world impact rather than just publications and metrics. Additional Resources Technology

Consciousness and Agency: A Critique of Methodological Naturalism

283
Mind Matters
March 21, 2024
In this episode, host Angus Menuge continues a discussion with Dr. Robert Larmer about his chapter on methodological naturalism in the recent volume Minding the Brain. In this segment of the conversation, Menuge and Larmer examine the justifications for methodological naturalism and critique some of the common arguments. They discuss the claim that non-natural causes are unknowable by scientific inquiry and argue that this assumption is not justified. They also address the argument that methodological naturalism is necessary for science, arguing instead that it puts science in a straight jacket, preventing it from recognizing nonphysical causes. Inferring a nonphysical cause, Larmer argues, does not have to be a science stopper and can be challenged like any other explanation. Also

ID the Future

Why Science Needs a Scout Mindset

1887
Jonathan McLatchie
April 10, 2024
Scout or soldier? When it comes to our opinions and beliefs, there's a bit of both in all of us. But which mindset is more beneficial? On this ID The Future, host Andrew McDiarmid welcomes Dr. Jonathan McLatchie to discuss the characteristics of a scout mindset and how it relates to the debate over evolution and the evidence for intelligent design. Get full show notes at idthefuture.com.

Meyer & Tour on New Critiques of Origin of Life Research

1886
Stephen C. Meyer
April 8, 2024
On this ID The Future, we're pleased to share a new discussion between Dr. James Tour and Dr. Stephen Meyer about recent critiques of origin of life research published in the prestigious science journal Nature. The interview originally aired on The Science and Faith Podcast, hosted by Dr. Tour. We are grateful to Dr. Tour for permission to share this interview on ID The Future.

A Battle of Predictions: Junk DNA’s ‘Kuhnian’ Paradigm Shift

1885
Casey Luskin
April 5, 2024
Prevailing scientific assumptions often die hard, especially when they fit so neatly into an evolutionary view of the development of life on earth. On this episode of ID The Future from the archive, Dr. Casey Luskin gives host Andrew McDiarmid the scoop on one of the biggest mistakes in science of our lifetime: the concept of "junk DNA." Even if you’ve already heard this episode, listen again, and then share it with a friend! The myth of junk DNA is a major example of why a Darwinian paradigm can slow the progress of science, while a design perspective can open up new avenues for research and discovery. Find additional show notes at idthefuture.com.

Humanize

Mark Davis Pickup on Living with Intense Suffering and Experiencing a Miraculous Healing

12
Wesley J. Smith
April 8, 2024
We live in a time in which eliminating suffering is considered by many to be society’s ultimate purpose. Too often, this leads to policies that eliminate suffering by eliminating the sufferer. Still, for those not experiencing intense pain or anguish, arguing for improved care instead of increased access to assisted suicide or euthanasia can seem like a blithe platitude. “If you were really suffering,” I have heard repeatedly in my more than thirty years involved with these issues, “you would sing a different tune.” Perhaps. But many people who suffer intensely sing from the same songbook. One, is my good friend and guest for this episode of Humanize, Mark Pickup. Pickup has experienced the intense terror and anguish caused by disabling and progressive multiple sclerosis

Dr. Charles Camosy on Current Trends in Bioethics

11
Wesley J. Smith
March 11, 2024
To say the least, bioethics is controversial. Many in the mainstream movement reject the sanctity and equal dignity of human life around issues such as abortion, assisted suicide, and biotechnology. But there is a robust pushback against such approaches—a human dignity bioethics, if you will—that promotes medical ethics and public health policies that align with the “do no harm” ethic of the Hippocratic Oath. The differences in these approaches impact our very understanding about the meaning and importance of human life. How do these distinctions play are among the most important and contentious controversies of the day. To get a handle on the current bioethics landscape, Wesley interviewed one of the most impressive and energetic defenders of human exceptionalism in

Stephen C. Meyer on the Crisis of Trust in Science

10
Wesley J. Smith
February 26, 2024
It is no secret that most of society’s critical institutions are suffering from a crisis of trust. One of these is science, which heretofore enjoyed the confidence of the vast majority of the American people. To learn, what happened, whether the loss of confidence is deserved, and what can be done about it, Wesley asked the Director of the Discovery Institute’s Center for Science and Culture to engage the crisis. This is Meyer’s second appearance on Humanize. Dr. Stephen C. Meyer received his Ph.D. in the philosophy of science from the University of Cambridge and is a former geophysicist and college professor. He authored Signature in the Cell, which was named a Book of the Year for 2009 by the Times of London, the New York Times best seller, Darwin’s Doubt, and most