A Case Against Accident and Self-organization [Hardcover]

Dean L. Overman (Author)

Book Description

Publication Date: April 23, 1998

In this illuminating book, Dean L. Overman uses logical principles and mathematical calculations to answer the questions that have long perplexed biologists and astrophysicists: Is it mathematically possible that accidental processes caused the formation of the first form of living matter from non-living matter? Could accidental processes have caused the formation of a universe compatible with life? Are current self-organization scenarios for the formation of the first living matter plausible? Overman reviews the influence of metaphysical assumptions in logical analysis, and discusses the principles of logic applicable to these questions, examining the limitations of verbal and mathematical logic. He proceeds to demonstrate that it is mathematically impossible that accidental processes produced the first living matter. The author also examines other issues related to the creation of the universe, including Stephen Hawking's no boundary proposal, the need for a Creator as the preserving cause of the universe, and the explanations offered by the weak and strong anthropic principles. Acclaimed by theologians and scientists alike as well-argued, coherent, and persuasive, A Case Against Accicdent and Self-Organization is a fascinating study of the origins of life and our universe.

Editorial Reviews

Review

Overman's 'brief' finds implausible the claims that life evolved from nonlife by chance and that the conditions for life in the universe are without cause. . . . As clear and straightforward an argument as one can find. (First Things )

The author has provided an eminently readable and interesting book. (Glenn Wyper Reformed Review, Fall 98, Vo. 52 N0. 1 )

The writing is very clear, with hierarchic organization of numbered sections and subsections. Overman writes for the intelligent layperson, making this fine presentation of the argument for Design accessible to a wide audience. (Charles E. Chaffey Book Reviews, Vo. 51, No. 1, March 99 )

Overman's Brilliant book A Case Against Accident and Self-Organization will demonstrate to any reader that the universe we know could hardly have arisen by chance. (The American Enterprise )

Overman's Brilliant book A Case Against Accident and Self-Organization will demonstrate to any reader that the universe we know could hardly have arisen by chance. (The American Enterprise )

For entertainment, Mr. Overman likes to ponder the origins of life on Earth, the mysteries of quantum mechanics and the nuances of particle physics. His mastery of these fields has earned him the respect and admiration of scholars from Cambridge to Harvard. (Mona Charen The Washington Times )

A valuable contribution to the discussion about the relationship between natural science and theology. (Wolfhart Pannenberg )

...impressive work. (Philosophia Christi )

About the Author

Dean L. Overman is the senior partner in the Washington, D.C. office of Winston & Strawn, a large international law firm. He is the coauthor of several law books, the author of many law review articles on banking, commercial, corporate, tax, and securities laws, the author of a book on effective writing, and an Adjunct Fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

Dean L. Overman is the senior partner in the Washington, D.C. office of Winston & Strawn, a large international law firm. He is the coauthor of several law books, the author of many law review articles on banking, commercial, corporate, tax, and securities laws, the author of a book on effective writing, and an Adjunct Fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

Product Details

• Hardcover: 240 pages
• Publisher: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers (April 23, 1998)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0847689662
• ISBN-13: 978-0847689668
• Product Dimensions: 8.8 x 5.8 x 0.8 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1 pounds (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 3.7 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (18 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #1,403,211 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

86 of 99 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars McGintry may review too many books without reading them, July 22, 2000

By A Customer

Amazon Verified Purchase

This review is from: A Case Against Accident and Self-organization (Hardcover)

McGintry may have glanced through this book and then written his review. The book clearly states that self-organization can produce ordered patterns in systems with an energy flow. But equally clearly, and repeatedly, the book persuasively demonstrates that ordered patterns are irrelevant to the origin of life. No plausible theory has ever been developed whereby self-organizing systems could produce INFORMATION. The origin of information, not the origin of complex patterns, is the central problem in origin of life scenarios. McGintry is clearly unfamiliar with Shannon's theory of information which contains universal laws which demonstrate that living matter could not have come from the laws of physics and chemistry. See Yockey's book by Cambridge University Press. All McGintry had to do was read even a portion of the conclusions to understand the difference between ordered patterns and biologically relevant information. For example from page 185 of Overman's book:

"To construct a plausible theory for the origin of life, scientists need to discover a theory which explains the generation of complexity, not the generation of order. In terms of the formation of life, information content, such as found in the genetic code, is the stumbling block."

As Overman plainly demonstrates, Sim's ordered patterns in the evolution of a fish are irrelevant to the origin of life. The problem, as constantly argued in the book, is the impossiblity of generating INFORMATION (instructions in DNA) from the laws of physics and chemistry. McGintry should also read the book to see that Dawkins book is dealt with in two separate places.

If McGintry has "seen" self-organization work to create life (which means create information), he should put himself up for the Nobel Prize; because no one has any plausible ideas concerning the source of biologically relevant information.

38 of 44 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Order is not information, September 24, 2002

By 

Raymond F. Hendrix (Idyllwild California) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

Amazon Verified Purchase

This review is from: A Case Against Accident and Self-organization (Hardcover)

Overman has written the obvious truth in the matter of self organization and accident as it relates to any origin of life scenario. What he clearly spells out in his book cannot honestly be disputed even though he humbly suggests that he is only presenting a "case" that should be evaluated by reasonable persons. Of course this subject is often NOT evaluated by reasonable persons but by fanatics and people with preconceived mind sets on one side or the other.

Reading some of the reviews here I find the usual practice of building straw men and setting fire to them. Overman is not a fanatic with an agenda but he does have an ability that many scientists have long lost in the continuing debate of theism v. atheism. Logic and facts are supposed to be the realm of science but when words are twisted and redefined one can only assume that the truth is not the final goal but rather the promotion of an ideology. The facts however speak for themselves and twisting them does not change reality. The essence of the book is that biological laws do not spring "accidently" or even on purpose from the laws of physics and chemistry. Self organization of a biological system is impossible. Of course theists have long believed in miracles so I supposed that atheists are entitled to believe in them as well. The point is that miracles are supposed to be "unscientific" yet now materialistic science believes in them and they peddle their wares as if they were the latest thing produced form rational minds.

The key word is "information". Information theory has nothing to do with the laws of physics except in the sense that the words printed in a book relate to those laws. Yes, DNA and RNA obey chemical laws quite obediently and so does the chalk that the teacher uses to write her lesson on the blackboard. In fact the whole universe and everything in it obeys those laws. But, DNA as it is used in an organism in real life is not organized according to the laws of physics. As an example, if we took some square blocks that were identical except that each one had a different letter of the alphabet printed on it we could soon see that we could arrange them in any order we chose and still not violate any laws of physics. Whether they were arranged to spell "building blocks" or "dingbats" the laws are not violated.

DNA is arranged the same way. It contains useful INFORMATION. The laws of physics have nothing to do with that arrangement. DNA can be ordered in any arrangement just like the blocks, and still obey chemical laws. The information comes from somewhere but not from the laws of physics. It cannot arrange itself accidently into any meaningful order because the information must be interpreted, translated and actually used in a practical way in order for life to come forth. Time is the worst enemy of the materialist fanatic. He does not have infinite time for his monkeys to type endlessly on their trillions of typewriters. He is limited by the age of the universe and by constraints brought about by extreme temperatures and so forth. Only one who believes in miracles can believe that the volumes of specified and instructive information contained in even the simplest conceived biological cell came about by accident. And evolution cannot help him because the information is the essential ingredient of life and must exist before evolution can even operate! The catch all phrase "evolution did it" does not work here. The fanatics will have to try another catch phrase now in order to perpetuate their delusion that there is no God except evolution.

Of course the latest thing now is "the edge of chaos". There are interesting books on this with interesting pictures. Some (like Richard Dawkins) apparently think that if you give your audience clever computer generated pictures they will think that you have actually produced life without all of the mess. Dawkins is more of the "evolution did it" crowd however. He is now being left behind by the "chaos theory" people. Of course they cannot produce information of the type in question either but the pictures are pretty anyway. In a nut shell, all of these new ideas brought forth by people playing with computers ignore the source of information. They happily punch their keys and create their programs with their own intelligent input and their "simple rules" and still they cannot produce information but only order. Of course even the wind can stack our blocks into some type of order. But that order has nothing to do with meaningful information that is produced by the teacher writing on the blackboard or the child who arranges the blocks to spell out "information is not physics!"

There is much more to the book and it is written so that people can understand it without resorting to bind faith in the opinions of experts who for some reason do not care for the idea that there just may be a God and they may not be one.

20 of 22 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars One of the most airtight arguments against an evolutionary origin of life ever written., August 25, 2005

By 

A. Strobel (West Texas) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: A Case Against Accident and Self-Organization (Paperback)

If this treatment of the subject of origins doesn't convince skeptics that holding onto the belief that life arose from non-life is an operation of faith rather than science, then nothing will. Over and over, Overman (no pun intended) demonstrates, in exhaustive detail, the fact that there is absolutely no principle in the laws of physics, chemistry, or astronomy that speaks to the origin of INFORMATION necessary for life to exist. And not just a little information; MILLIONS of specific, different, instructions necessary for the simplest form of life to exist. The belief (which is exactly how to describe the view: a belief) that information arose from non-information defies all logical limits, even based upon the most conservative estimates, and is simply not scientific.

Now, I am not saying that "faith" is a foolish position. In fact, to believe in the possibility of something existing that is merely beyond our ability to measure is a reasonable position. It simply and humbly admits that our knowledge and ability to measure is, and always will be, finite. Therefore, we must always admit that some non-material, non-energy, non-dimension things may exist that we simply lack the ability to detect. Such a faith is simply a logical conclusion in the face of our finiteness in the universe. To the contrary, a faith in the mathematically impossible, as defined and limited to a known set of parameters (the laws of nature and the irreducible complexity of the genetic code), is beyond all reasonable definitions of faith and just plain fool hearty. It reminds me of Jim Carrey's memorable line in the movie Dumb and Dumber when the female lead tells him that he only has a one in a million chance of getting a date with her, to which he exclaims, "So your saying I have a chance!" The only difference is that the probability of the simplest DNA or RNA molecule forming by accident in the best case scenario conceivable, is one in a million, million, million, million, million, million chance. Now, if Intelligent Design proponents are made out to be as dumb as Jim Carrey's character with a one in a million chance, then I wonder who's dumber?