[jbloedow]

Marx was an ideologue with little respect for facts...

Well it's incredibly easy to criticize Marx & Freud now that they have been largely discredited and act as if it's oh-so-obvious that they were phonies, but at the zenith of their movements, every respectable member of the fields of economics and psychotherapy, respectively, consider them to be almost beyond criticism, their theories not just theories, but the most compelling organized understandings of their subject matters.

In fact, to have criticized them at one time is to have committed professional suicide. Marx and Freud's disciples would have marshalled impressive defenses of their Prophets during the heady days of their dominance.

Darwin is still in his heyday. But I'm sure it's oh-so-different in this case. Yes, that's right, it's different with Darwin..

[CarolinaGuitarman]

" Darwin is still in his heyday. But I'm sure it's oh-so-different in this case. Yes, that's right, it's different with Darwin.."

Yes, because Darwin marshaled facts.

"...but at the zenith of their movements, every respectable member of the fields of economics and psychotherapy, respectively, consider them to be almost beyond criticism, their theories not just theories, but the most compelling organized understandings of their subject matters."

Not with Marx and Freud this isn't true. Your knowledge of economic and psychiatric history is as bad as your knowledge of biology and it's history.

[snarks_when_bored]

Yes, Marx and Freud are in decline, but they've always had their critics. And, yes, the main point I was making was emphasizing the difference between a real scientist—Darwin—and the other two.

If it's your wish to show that Darwin was wrong, though, you can: go out in the field and find a hominid fossil buried under, say, 200 million-year-old clay. But remember: showing that Darwin was wrong doesn't show that ID is right.

[RunningWolf]

touche placemarker