User:Ed Poor/blog
11:23, 27 October 2005 (UTC) I'm trying to inject some sense into the debate over Stolen Honor / Stolen Valor / Winter Soldier Investigation and the related "anti-war" movement. It seems that "anti-war" is not the same as pacifism even though anti means against; one would expect that anti + war = against war but everyone decided to imbue the term with a different meaning. It's a peculiar meaning and one that is hard to pin down.
Carroll argued that few readers were likely to read the entire Times article, and therefore, the following opening lines were especially misleading:
- "At the heart of the debate over intelligent design is this question: Can a scientific explanation of the history of life include the actions of an unseen higher being?"
Instead, argued Carroll, the Times should have framed the opening of the news article around the angle of epistemological authority, emphasizing that the debate really turned on the following question:
- "Should the content of high-school science courses be decided by scientists, or by religiously-motivated public-relations campaigns?" [1]