Ben Stein is flashing some skin for the new Intelligent Design propaganda documentary film “Expelled.”

He’s the film’s mascot and showman as evidenced by the movie’s slick hyperbole filled website. With his bare knees, grotesquely enlarged head, and sour expression, Stein manages to permanently ruin the school uniform fetish for anyone who isn’t a 60 year old Nixon speech writer.

Oh, gotta love the Big Science logo they created (see it waving on the flag on the website) with the globe, book, and the lock, and the slogan “No Intelligence Allowed.” Their marketers and designers are really good! (and they’ve probably played too much of the game Bully)

There’s obviously a decent bit of cash behind this film. The website is slick as is the trailer, and it’s being promoted by Motive, the people behind Gibson’s Passion of the Christ marketing blitz. This isn’t another nutjob with a movie camera, we’re looking at a full out well-crafted propaganda film that stands to revitalize the ID movement left bruised after the Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District court case.

This time they’re coming at it with the free speech angle so beloved by the right wing crowd as of late — as evidenced by Ben Stein’s megaphone and the graffiti font. As The Bad Idea Blog states, “Considering the audience and marketing, the focus of the film is savvy: almost entirely on the meta-issue of the alleged intellectual suppression of ideas, complete with folks like Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris as the bogeymen getting ready to man the gulags.”

The movie will probably be full of hyperbole, re-edited hidden-agenda interviews, and outright lies. PZ Myers of Pharyngula will be probably be seen in the movie as he was interviewed earlier this year by Mark Mathis, the associate producer of Expelled, who lied about the title and nature of the film. What we’re looking at is Ben Stein as a conservative Michael Moore, but probably with even less fact-checking.

Sadly, the movie is probably going to go over well with it’s target audience, and it’ll probably sway over a bunch of people who could have cared less before. This renewed push will probably result in more stupid ID legislation and more IDiots being elected to local school boards. Intelligent Design is bankrupt without anything to hold it up scientifically, but the facts didn’t stand in the way of our President’s case for war.

The fight with ID obviously isn’t over yet. One day, it may finally fizzle out as public opinion grows tried of it — I’ll rejoice when that day comes — but in the mean time our bedraggled academic system continues to have to waste it’s time and resources battling ID’s incessant PR machine.

For those of you too busy to keep abreast of the latest internet kurfluffle, the LiveJournal community has been in a bit of an uproar over the mass deletion of journal accounts and communities. It seems in the rush to “protect children” Barak Berkowitz, chairman and chief executive of Six Apart, got a bit carried away.

“Our decision here was not based on pure legal issues. It was based on what community we want to build and what we think is appropriate within that community and what’s not.”
–Barak Berkowitz, chairman and CEO, Six Apart

As with any broad swipe based on keywords, several child abuse survivor help groups and the like also got deleted in the process. The chairman has apologized for this and I’m sure this regrettable bit of collateral damage will be rectified.

However, more unknown is the status of the gray area content such as the slash fiction communities that got the cut. Slash fiction is SciFi/Fantasy/Comic fan fiction where one or more fictional characters has a sexual romp with another in all it’s lavishly detailed glory. It’s not really my cup of spanish fly, but whatever floats your panties.

That danged first amendment… or Liberals have morals?

Here in lies the problem of course, not everyone shares my liberal ambivalence with slash fiction and other harmless fetishes. Obviously most BoingBoing readers do as evidence by this hard-line first amendment quote:

“So the only policy that’s safe from turning into tyranny is to allow all speech, no matter how uncomfortable it makes you. Yes, people could be harmed; yes, even children. Freedom is more important.”

This stance nicely exemplifies the definition of liberal morality put forth by social psychologist Jonathan Haidt: The moral foundations theory, put forth by Haidt, states that there are five innate psychological morality systems. Liberals base most of their morals on the measure of Harm/Care and Fairness/Reciprocity; whereas, conservatives balance these with the foundations of Ingroup/Loyalty, Authority/Respect, and Purity/Sanctity. This also can be described as a tendency to base morality on a individual rights basis versus a structural community basis. For more on this, I highly highly suggest you watch the fascinating video talk of Haidt on morality at the 2007 New Yorker Conference.

Rationality comes late to the game

Haidt also is known for his hypothesis that morality is largely instinctual and any rational statements are all developed post-hoc. This doesn’t mean that it is in-born only that one learns morality through mostly subconscious socio-emotional means rather than rational means. For more on this read “The Emotional Dog and its Rational Tail: A Social Intuitionist Approach to Moral Judgment [PDF] and/or The Believer magazine’s interview with Haidt.

Haidt’s ideas are very interesting and they explain a lot more than George Lakoff’s strict father/nurturant parent model of conservative vs. liberal morality. Lakoff also has a lot of interesting things to say, but I’ve always been a bit skeptical of it’s veridicality because the metaphor is too convenient.

In any case, no matter which morality theory you side with, it’s obvious that conservatives and liberals have very different flavors of morality. If we want to develop a communication between the two sides, rather than pure chest pounding, we need both sides to better understand one another—and themselves. This stands true whether we are ones to fantasize about the Jesus references in Narnia or the homosexual subtext of Sam and Frodo.