The purpose of the Templeton Foundation is [...] to try to blur the lines between science and religion and corrupt the public discourse.
What’s your basis for this interpretation? And particularly the “corrupt the public discourse” bit? I read your link, and I remember it getting briefly badmouthed in The God Delusion, but I’d prefer something a little more solid to go on, since this seems to lie on the sharp side of Hanlon’s razor.
Well, here’s Sean Carroll’s take on the matter. They don’t seem like the worst organization in the world or anything, but I too was disappointed to hear about Max accepting their money.
Thanks, that’s the kind of thing I was looking for. I’d expect (boundedly) rational people to be able to disagree on the utility of promoting secularism, but Carroll’s take on it does seem like a reasonable and un-Hanlony approach to the issue.
What’s your basis for this interpretation? And particularly the “corrupt the public discourse” bit? I read your link, and I remember it getting briefly badmouthed in The God Delusion, but I’d prefer something a little more solid to go on, since this seems to lie on the sharp side of Hanlon’s razor.
Well, here’s Sean Carroll’s take on the matter. They don’t seem like the worst organization in the world or anything, but I too was disappointed to hear about Max accepting their money.
Thanks, that’s the kind of thing I was looking for. I’d expect (boundedly) rational people to be able to disagree on the utility of promoting secularism, but Carroll’s take on it does seem like a reasonable and un-Hanlony approach to the issue.
If I was offered $9m, I’d take it! Not that anyone’s offering. But it’s definitely a significant hit to his credibility.