Proponents of Creationism but not Proponents of Evolution Frame the Origins Debate in Terms of Proof

&
Science & Education 22 (3):577-603 (2013)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This article has no associated abstract. (fix it)

Categories

Keywords

Reprint years

DOI

10.1007/s11191-012-9451-y

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,667

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

My notes

Similar books and articles

Intelligent Design Creationism and Its Critics: Philosophical, Theological, and Scientifc Perspectives.Robert T. Pennock (ed.) - 2001 - MIT Press.
The Origins of Creationism in the Netherlands: The Evolution Debate among Twentieth-Century Dutch Neo-Calvinists.Abraham C. Flipse - 2012 - Church History 81 (1):104-147.
Evolution versus Creationism: the public education controversy.J. Peter Zetterberg (ed.) - 1983 - Phoenix, AZ: Oryx Press.
Mapping the Origins Debate: Six Models of the Beginning of Everything. [REVIEW]Scott D. G. Ventureyra - 2016 - Science Et Esprit 68 (2-3):404-409.
I also Survived a Debate with a Creationist (with reflections on the perils of democratic information).Kelly C. Smith - 2012 - Reports of the National Center for Science Education 32 (2).
Is Intelligent Design creationism?Massimo Pigliucci - 2009 - In Kendrick Frazier (ed.), Science Under Siege: Defending Science, Exposing Pseudoscience. Prometheus.
Should Intelligent Design be Taught in Public School Science Classrooms?Anya Plutynski - 2010 - Science & Education 19 (6-8):779-795.
Creationism is not special.Cristobal Bellolio - 2023 - Educational Philosophy and Theory 55 (1):68-76.
Why Creationism Should Not Be Taught as Science: The Legal Issues.Frederick Edwords - 1983 - In J. Peter Zetterberg (ed.), Evolution versus Creationism: the public education controversy. Phoenix, AZ: Oryx Press. pp. 361.
What Science Can and Cannot Say: The Problems with Methodological Naturalism.Reed Richter - 2002 - Reports of the National Center for Science Education 22 (Jan-Apr 2002):18-22.

Analytics

Added to PP
2018-02-15

Downloads
20 (#1,046,673)

6 months
6 (#879,768)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Add more citations

References found in this work

The aim and structure of physical theory.Pierre Maurice Marie Duhem - 1954 - Princeton,: Princeton University Press.
The Logic of Scientific Discovery.Karl Popper - 1959 - Studia Logica 9:262-265.
The Logic of Scientific Discovery.K. Popper - 1959 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 10 (37):55-57.
The Aim and Structure of Physical Theory.Pierre Duhem & Philip P. Wiener - 1955 - Science and Society 19 (1):85-87.

View all 21 references / Add more references