Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Ben Stein's Intelligent Adventure (Review of EXPELLED: No Intelligence Allowed)
American Thinker ^ | April 13,2008 | Kate Wright

Posted on 04/13/2008 5:17:21 PM PDT by SeekAndFind

Ben Stein's new film EXPELLED: No Intelligence Allowed, is a documentary that appears to be about Intelligent Design and the shortcomings of Darwinism. The film is not just an exploration of the limitations of The Origin of Species, but a journey to uncover the mindset that Darwinism engendered among those with an agenda to replace traditional understandings of God with pure materialism.

But far from offering a weighty discourse on theories of monism, Stein delivers a pop culture MTV-style Road Film that has already reignited the Culture Wars, with a just-issued cease and desist letter from a group at Harvard. The Harvard letter claims that a clip in the film plagiarizes an "Inner Life of the Cell" animation, and possible further legal action could disrupt the opening of the film on April 18.

We enter Ben Stein's argument through images of the building of the Berlin Wall. Using inter-cuts, upbeat music, original text, and exciting graphics, Ben creates his own music video genre, as he visits professors who were "expelled" from universities and think tanks for merely mentioning the words "Intelligent Design" in their work.

Then, unexpectedly, we find ourselves in Dachau Concentration Camp, but this is no ordinary detour. Suddenly, we realize that Ben is about to link Darwinism to Nazism, by way of exposing the mindset of that gave way to the Jewish Holocaust.

The gas chambers of Dachau are horrifyingly familiar. What begs question of the ontological connection between Darwinism and Nazism, however, is the tour of the Nazi Hadamar Eugenics Labs. Watching a modern-day German woman guide Ben through the labs is, to put it mildly, revolting. Despite Ben's gentle prodding, she remains neutral throughout, unmoved, as she impassively informs Ben that 15,000 victims were exterminated in the gas ovens of the Eugenics labs during World War II. Then, despite her polite demeanor, she confirms what we fear most. She is unable to express any remorse whatsoever for the atrocities that happened; how Nazis, in pursuit of the master race, exterminated disabled, insane, feeble-minded, homosexual, and fragile human beings, alongside 6,000,000 Jews.

By revealing this mindset for its arrogance and profound lack of shame, Ben succeeds in motivating a new generation of film-goers to "Never again!" tolerate genocide. At the same time, he pushes the "story" forward through the ideas behind the story.

The "Story Spine": Materialism vs. Consciousness

All great movies reveal moral truth. They reveal what the story is about through the ideas behind the story. In this film, the "spine" that reveals the "story" hinges on the conflict between materialism, as Darwinism, and consciousness, as Intelligent Design.

Materialism is a philosophy that holds that the only thing that can be proven to exist is matter. In general terms, Darwinism relies on materialism, to the exclusion of dualism, pluralism, and idealism. Intelligent Design, by contrast, relies on consciousness in the realm of phenomenal reality, to explain that which cannot be explained by matter.

In simple terms, Darwinism addresses the material changes that take place in cells in evolution, but never addresses the origin of life itself. In a world where materialism prevails, there is a permanent academic divide between Darwinism and Intelligent Design; and like two cultures separated by the Berlin Wall, never the twain shall meet.

The reality that godless materialism gave way to Darwinism and, at the same time, became the basis (as historical materialism) for Nazism, may be too much 19th Century German intellectual history (Kant, Kierkegaard, Feuerbach, Nietsche, Marx, Engels, and Hegel) for some viewers to appreciate within this 93-minute film. For others, this is why Ben's nexus creates a fascinating road-trip unlike any other.

Free Speech

Rather than detail the implications of Neo-Darwinism by tracing the history of dialectical materialism and historical materialism in the development of Nazism, Ben makes his satirical case by featuring the flappable faces of authoritarian academics who ferociously deny Ben's right of academic inquiry into the origin of life and the universe. In so doing, Ben succeeds in positioning this film, in the narrow context, as an argument against academic suppression, and in the larger context, as the "must see" pop culture argument for free speech.

Via onscreen interviews with Neo-Darwinists such as Professor Richard ("The God Delusion") Dawkins, Ben typifies the pervasive practice of authoritarian attitudes in academic elites, particularly toward God-fearing people. As such, this is not a film about believers vs. non-believers. This is a first-rate expose about the consequences of suppressing freedom of expression, based on the questionable assumption that atheistic secularism is the state religion of the United States of America.

As history reveals, however, the proliferation of any fascist, authoritarian or totalitarian mindset wreaks grave consequences that are not limited to the atrocities that happened in Hitler's Germany. Stalinism, Maoism, and Communism plagued the 20th Century with the world's most sinister dictators (Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, to name a few) who delivered mass genocides totaling well over 130 million deaths.

The Problem of God

This film states that Neo-Darwinism is about world view, not scientific exploration. At its heart, however, the film also addresses the role of consciousness in human development; that is, the capacity to discern right from wrong. By depicting this dialectic through the prism of the Holocaust, the film succeeds in raising the most basic philosophical question we all face as human beings: The Problem of God.

To make this point in the historical context, Ben visits the Jefferson Memorial and the Washington Monument, to rediscover the true meaning of freedom. By reminding us that freedom exists as a gift from God, Ben brings to light that America defends the dignity and rights of all human beings, regardless of race or creed, by virtue of the fact that that "all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator, with certain inalienable rights."

The Desire to be God

Meanwhile, the viewer is tacitly making his or her private assessment of the two sets of onscreen proponents and their opposing world views: 1) those that ascribe to the atheistic (Darwinian) view that reflects itself in the extreme end of the materialist realm as the desire to be god, and 2) those that credit the theistic (Intelligent Design) view that reveals itself in the idealist realm, as the search for God.

In a sublime moment at the film's climax, Ben presses Professor Richard Dawkins to explain the origins of life. According to Professor Dawkins, there is no God; but it is possible, and indeed likely, that intelligent life from outer space landed on earth, and that's how it all got going.

Freedom of Moral Conscience (The Moral of the Story)

Discerning right from wrong is different from knowing right from wrong. The German tour guide at Hadamar Eugenics Labs may have been able to discern right from wrong, but somehow, was not able to know right from wrong.

This capacity for moral conscience, like academic and scientific inquiry, is fundamental to freedom of expression. Despite all the failed ideas and experiments along the continuum of intellectual history, we still return to, and America relies on, the universal moral truths handed down by the Jews, to all human beings in the form of moral conscience, through Christian Enlightenment.

And for those who insist on authoritarian scientific inquiry to the exclusion of other forms of expression, please be referred to Webster for the etymology of the word conscience, with its Latin roots "com+scire" which literally means "to know more...at science."

As images of the Berlin Wall being torn down fill the screen, we are left with the idea that freedom of thought is fundamental to the scientific process, as well as to the search for God and the development of a moral conscience.

Above all, we appreciate that America (where 82% believe in God) is the hope for mankind. And this movie, thanks to freedom of expression, is for grown-ups, regardless of age.

EXPELLED: No Intelligence Allowed opens nationally on April 18.

--------------------------------------------------------

Kate Wright is the author of Screenwriting is Storytelling.


TOPICS: Education; Religion; Science; TV/Movies
KEYWORDS: benstein; darwin; darwinism; expelled; hollywood; intelligentdesign; moviereview
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-117 next last
To: MrB

Yeah. A little bloodied up.


41 posted on 04/14/2008 3:23:36 PM PDT by nmh (Intelligent people recognize Intelligent Design (God).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: nmh
The editor in chief is a rabbit homosexual.


42 posted on 04/14/2008 3:27:16 PM PDT by Revolting cat! ("I am like...Dude......do you really....like want the Sex?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: nmh

Is it too much to ask that your provide supporting evidence for any of your claims?


43 posted on 04/14/2008 3:28:48 PM PDT by tokenatheist (Can I play with madness?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: nmh
The editor in chief is a rabbit homosexual. Scientific American is no longer a “science” magazine. It is liberal propaganda. As a liberal, I don't expect you to see that. You can not get more biased on evolution that Scientific American. Enjoy the godless world and magic black box of fellow atheist. Now don't get upset. I don't mind if your religion is evolution.

Can I take it then that you didn't like the review I posted? Or did you even read it before going off on an entirely unrelated rant about the presumed sexual orientation of the editor of the magazine? Is that what passes for research among creationists, or is it just you?

Whatever. Here's another review for you to ignore. And don't bother to enlighten me on the sexual orientation of the editor or author. It doesn't matter as much to me as it obviously does to you.

Science Sunday: Intelligent Design Goes to the Movies

44 posted on 04/14/2008 5:39:04 PM PDT by Coyoteman (Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Mamzelle
There is nothing extreme about finding the roots of Darwinism in the Holocaust--the "Master Race" was about exterminating "inferiors"

Indeed, one would have to be pretty lame to deny there is some sort of deep connection between the two, after, say, reviewing the notes on my FR homepage.

Darwinism gone mad, but Darwinism nonetheless.

I don't agree that eugenics is darwinism gone mad. What makes eugenics plausible is the Darwinian notion of heredity. That is, anything you imagine can be inherited or passed along to offspring. Darwin even thought that the 'progress of America' was a germinal trait that could be inherited and selected for. Things have not changed one whit since then, as you can see for yourself when you read evolutionists rant on about the evolution of bird-songs, mating-habits, morality, religion, preferenced for blondes, alcoholism, homosexuality... none of which can be idenitfied with anything in genetic matter. Eugenics is merely a consequence of the usual darwinian way of thinking about heredity.

45 posted on 04/15/2008 1:26:21 AM PDT by Ethan Clive Osgoode (see FR homepage for Euvolution v0.2.1)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

Another "review:"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NiNGK3y5Ypg

46 posted on 04/15/2008 7:45:35 AM PDT by Coyoteman (Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Revolting cat!

Oh, bravo...well done...


47 posted on 04/15/2008 11:29:09 AM PDT by andysandmikesmom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Revolting cat!; nmh
I think probably, this is more the idea.

Photobucket

48 posted on 04/15/2008 2:56:37 PM PDT by Gumlegs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Coyoteman

I received my Expelled Event & Resource Kit in today’s Fedex run. Will not have time for a few days to look at it but will let everyone know what it contains as soon as I can.


49 posted on 04/15/2008 3:08:21 PM PDT by tokenatheist (Can I play with madness?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Coyoteman
"...rant about the presumed sexual orientation of the editor of the magazine?"

And,

" It doesn't matter as much to me as it obviously does to you."

Well Coyoteman I believe your showing your true colors (rainbow)!

50 posted on 04/15/2008 3:17:15 PM PDT by celmak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: celmak
Well Coyoteman I believe your showing your true colors (rainbow)!

It seems more like some here are showing their true colors (bigot).

The unreasoned hatred of homosexuals we are now seeing expressed on a regular basis on this site does not do anyone credit, nor does it lend any credibility to their arguments.

51 posted on 04/15/2008 3:23:37 PM PDT by Coyoteman (Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

Comment #52 Removed by Moderator

To: celmak
Well Coyoteman I believe your showing your true colors (rainbow)!

And you're showing yours: Yellow.

53 posted on 04/15/2008 4:32:45 PM PDT by onewhowatches
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: nmh
The editor in chief is a rabbit homosexual.

Would that be a lesbian who posed in Playboy?

54 posted on 04/15/2008 4:34:55 PM PDT by onewhowatches
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: onewhowatches; nmh
Would that be a lesbian who posed in Playboy?

It could happen.

55 posted on 04/15/2008 4:58:34 PM PDT by Gumlegs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Gumlegs; nmh

A lesbian, who’s good looking enough to pose in Playboy and smart enough to edit Scientific American. If that were a real person, I’d be in love, even though I wouldn’t stand a chance.


56 posted on 04/15/2008 5:19:10 PM PDT by onewhowatches
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: All

Scientists or professors who don’t believe in evo either get “expelled” or shunned.

Seems like somebody is afraid the truth might come out.


57 posted on 04/15/2008 9:12:35 PM PDT by Sun (Pray that God sends us good leaders. Please say a prayer now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: All

Ben Stein asked Dawkins if it COULD be ID, and Dawkins said YES, and GET THIS: Dawkins said it could be intelligent aliens from outer space.


58 posted on 04/15/2008 9:47:58 PM PDT by Sun (Pray that God sends us good leaders. Please say a prayer now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

Comment #59 Removed by Moderator

To: onewhowatches
A lesbian, who’s good looking enough to pose in Playboy and smart enough to edit Scientific American. If that were a real person, I’d be in love

Iv'e heard that some Evolutionist scientists believe it is the highest point in Evolution. Since you know so much about science, what do you say about homosexuality?

60 posted on 04/16/2008 6:46:48 AM PDT by celmak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-117 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson