Zygon 47 (4):662-665 (
2012)
Copy
BIBTEX
Abstract
This paper continues a dialogue that began with an
article by Jeffrey Koperski entitled “Two Bad Ways to Attack
Intelligent Design and Two Good Ones,” published in the June 2008
issue of Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science. In a response article,
Christopher Pynes argues that ad hominem arguments are sometimes
legitimate, especially when critiquing Intelligent Design (2012). We
show that Pynes’s examples only apply to matters of testimony, not
the kinds of arguments found in the best defenses of ID.