Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed

awakening : Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed | posted by Brian Rhea

A few nights ago, we were able to attend an advanced screening of Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed. The film intends to document the unfair treatment of ID proponents in the scientific community. You can see the trailer here if you're interested: http://www.expelledthemovie.com/playground.php. Unfortunately, in its current state, the movie is disappointing in that it fails to take this conversation anywhere new or productive. One of our friends was also at the screening and he sent the following e-mail to the producers. It describes perfectly the strengths and weaknesses of the documentary and I hope they take Austin's suggestions to heart. Austin McCollum:

After seeing the director's cut tonight of the upcoming movie starring Ben Stein, I have mixed reviews. My primary reservations about this movie are the tactics used. I was open-minded a movie like this would help give Intelligent Design [ID] a fair voice in the academic community. However, I found the documentary started down a slippery slope of dogmatic accusations. If this movie is an act of war, the tactics will win decisive battles. If this movie's goal is to rally the religious masses to action, it will succeed. Does the end justify the means? In the opinion of this proponent of ID, I fear the means will simply tip the scales to the other extreme instead of bringing a healthy balance to scientific thought.

I really enjoyed the first half of the movie. Ben Stein's dead pan humor builds bridges to many walks of life while presenting some compelling investigative journalism whetting my appetite for more. But suddenly the careful examination of legitimate walls and layers of inflexibility in academia turn to dramatic correlations comparing Origin of Species Evolutionists [OSEs] to the Nazi regime. I felt tricked. I felt like I was watching a Michael Moore movie - that although funny at times, reduces itself to sensationalist devices, awkward interview questions, and clever editing to prove a point.

So let me break down specifically the good parts and then where I think the producers / writers started down an unnecessary path. First, let me explain I am no opponent to deception and treachery when used strategically and for noble purposes. John Howard Griffin's elegant deception in his work, "Black Like Me," allowed him to write accurately of the oppressive environment many black people were trapped in. He became a whistleblower to the nation giving great credibility to African American suffrage adding high octane fuel to the civil rights movement. William Wilberforce used great subterfuge, as portrayed in the recent movie, "Amazing Grace," to flank politicians upholding the slave trade in England. He finally succeeded by surreptitiously proposing laws that would first strangle the flow of profit to the slave traders instead of trying to pass an abolishment law head-on. Some of the content of "Expelled" has great potential, possibly helping to open doors to important research and great discoveries by exposing bias in the academic community, but I think it should be presented in a more subtle approach.

For instance, the profiles examining real people's consequences faced by mentioning or writing on ID should be flushed out in more detail. Even better would be to fund an open-minded advocate of OSE to go deep undercover as an ID researcher. Can you imagine the response if one of their own made discoveries of oppression and cataloged the experience with details that could be verified? The two examples of researchers openly using ID paradigms to advance their work were brilliant. If the direct correlation to their work and monetary gain could be more clearly outlined, I believe the war could be won without firing a shot. This is more eloquently explained by Salvador Cordova in his blog post at http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/how-idists-can-win-the-war/

An avenue I hoped would be explored further, and even exploited for greater dramatic effect is the ignorance in the mass media about what ID really is. Discussing the boiler plate phrase hit home the fact ID has been pigeon holed by news outlets as a cult of creationism. Real empathy could have been generated by representing a room full of diverse world view scientists collaborating on some ID project or seminar. Lumping agnostics, Jews, Muslims, Xenobiologists, and Christians together in conversation is different than showing real people holding those views getting together and putting aside their religious differences for the advancement of a credible scientific paradigm.

I also liked the interview with the Polish man. Someone describing greater educational freedom in their country versus the U.S. pulls at the heartstrings of nationalistic pride. The other content though, describing the court system's role in contributing to the wall of bias separating the camps of OSE and ID was muddy.

So my problem with this movie and the grassroots campaign behind it is the war it is fueling. Anytime you bring THE holocaust in, it triggers or should trigger an emotional response. What I hear though, as I play the advocate, are my OSE friends giving an example of ID sponsored atrocities to match each Darwinian rooted evil. For every holocaust, they could cite the Crusades or the Inquisition. For every Gulag or Killing Fields they could bring up Jim Jones or Heaven's gate or the latest Intifada. The advancement of scientific thought has always seen setbacks from politics, greed, superstition and human pride. Does a movie spotlighting fear and revulsion for an enemy camp really advance scientific thought? I don't want to invite my OSE friends to a movie like this. I want to reach out to them. This movie is guerilla warfare. Maybe I'm out of touch with how bad it's gotten. I'd just rather see the revolution start within the academic community instead of ruled by an emotional mob that this movie targets. I am excited to see the movie when it's finished. I just hope I can give it a better review.

He received the following response:

Thank-you, Mr. McCollum, for your insightful and heartfelt review. We appreciate greatly your taking the time to provide such an informed commentary and will take it to heart as we continue to solicit feedback.

Comments

[sillysillysilly]

"go deep undercover as an ID researcher"

The problem with this is that there is no such thing as an "ID researcher". Because there is nothing to "guide" the research. No "principle" that allows a "prediction" of what will happen. This fact shows the "emptiness" of ID.

[Joe]

SillySillySilly- the simple way to crush an IDer in a debate is to ask him for evidence, not against Evolution, but for Intelligent Design!