Brin, David

David is science fiction writer, with a Ph.D. in space physics—his well-known books include Startide Rising, Kiln People, Heart of the Comet (with Greg Benford) and The Postman. David’s pioneering, vital, nonfiction book The Transparent Society weighs tradeoffs in privacy, surveillance, security and freedom and won the Freedom of Speech Award of the American Library Association.  He appears on many History Channel shows, such as "Life After People", "the Universe" and "The ArchiTechs." ...  David's popular blogs and essays cover ecology, the course of modern culture, coping in the 21st Century, implications of technology, future studies, space and the search for extraterrestrial intelligence (SETI). David’s ever-fertile mind seems always switched on.

........... Here, from Skeptic magazine, he takes on Intelligent Design:.

“Intelligent Design (ID) pays tribute to its rival, by demanding to be recognized as a direct and ‘scientific’ competitor with the Theory of Evolution. Unlike the Creationists of 20 years ago, proponents of ID no longer refer to biblical passages. Instead, they invoke modern notions of skepticism and cite alleged faulty evidence and/or uncertaintly in order to justify their argument that  students should be taught alternatives to evolution…. The import of this shift in strategy should not be minimized! What has changed goes beyond the mere armory of symbols and ideas being used. Proponents of Intelligent Design now appeal to notions that are far more a part of the lexicon of science than religion, notably openness to criticism, fair play, and respect for the contingent nature of truth… It is very clever to use the values generated by science, in order to encourage doubt toward science.  Those attempting to combat IE have been too slow to recognize this cleverness...

And yet, I believe the ID promoters have made a mistake. By basing their offensive on core notions of fair play and completeness, they have employed a clever short-term tactic, but have incurred a long-term strategic liability. Because, their grand conceptual error is in believing that their incantation of Intelligent Design is the only alternative to Darwinian evolution. But, of course, it is not, and there is a reply that can be used against them .......

If students deserve to weigh ID against natural selection, then why not also expose them to (a few examples from a larger number)… ...

1. Guided Evolution. This is the deist compromise most commonly held by thousands — possibly millions — of working scientists who want to reconcile science and faith….

2. Intelligent Design of Intelligent Designers (IDOID). Most Judeo-Christian sects dislike speculating about possible origins of the Creator…There is no way that such a fantastic entity as God could have simply erupted out of nothing. Such order and magnificence could not possibly have self-organized out of chaos. Only intelligence can truly create order, especially order of such a supreme nature. Note, the resulting discussion would be FAR more discomforting to IE proponents than the philosophically openminded Darwinists! 

3. Evolution of Intelligent Designers. Yes, you read me right….Any advocate of completeness would have to extend this evolutionary process beyond achieving mere sapience like ours, all the way to producing intelligence so potent that it can then start performing acts of creation on its own, manipulating and using black holes to fashion universes to specific design. In other words, there might be an intelligent designer of this world … who nevertheless came into being as a result of evolution. ....

4. Cycles of Creation. Perhaps the whole thing does not have a clear-cut beginning or end, but rolls along like a wheel? That certainly would allow enough macro-time for everything and anything to happen. Interestingly, the cyclical notion opens up infinite time for both evolution and intelligent designers … though not of any kind that will please ID promoters. Shall Hindu gurus and Mayan priest kings step up and demand equal time for their theories of creation cycles?....

5. Panspermia. This one is venerable and quite old within the scientific community, which posits that life on Earth may have been seeded from elsewhere in the cosmos….....There are other possibilities, and I am sure readers could continue adding to the list, long after I am done, such as… We’re living in a simulation… We’ve been resurrected at the Omega Point [see Tipler]… It’s all in your imagination … and so on…  

Each of these viewpoints can muster support from philosophers and even some modern physicists, and can gather as much supporting evidence as ID. In any case they are all equally defensible as concepts. And only censoring bullies would prevent students from hearing them and exercising their sovereign right to decide for themselves, right? Or, perhaps, they might even start private sessions after school, to study the science called … biology.”

 

(For the full essay, see http://www.davidbrin.com/parapsychology.html)

 Also: 

re progress and " singularities":  http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000EOU4RQ

.