Customer Reviews

Darwin Strikes Back: Defending the Science of Intelligent Design

5 star:		(16)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(7)

 

 

It is not often that scientific debates generate intense public interest and commentary. The American public is fascinated by scientific advances and debates (how to classify Pluto, for example) but generally does not feel the need to elect school board members who support teaching specific theories and ideas. Intelligent Design, a broad category of ideas that suggests chance and natural law are insufficient to explain all that we encounter in nature is an exception to this rule. Not only is it hotly contested within scientific circles, but it also results in intense political debate within the general population. The main reason for this is that both evolution and intelligent design have theological implications that extend well beyond the scientific issues themselves. Moreover, debates even within science about intelligent design often seem more acrimonious than normal scientific dialogue. They include character assassination, charges and counter charges of poor science, and claims that one or the other side is faking evidence. For those who are interested in following a blow by blow account of this debate from the 1980s to the present, Thomas Woodward's book is a good start. He honestly admits he is writing from the prospective of one who is convinced by the claims of intelligent design, but as an historian he does a decent job of representing the arguments of key players in the debate and an excellent job of pointing his readers to other (and more complete) sources so they can read the literature directly for themselves.

'Darwin Strikes Back' is meant to complement Woodward's previous study, 'Doubts about Darwin' in which he chronicled the rise of the Intelligent Design Movement and which focused mostly on the writings of Philip Johnson. In this book, Woodward examines three other major design theorists: Michael Behe, Jonathan Wells, and William Dembski, and their various critics, notably biologist Kenneth Miller, philosopher Niall Shanks, educator Eugenie Scott, and the ubiquitous Richard Dawkins. In every case, Woodward finds that critics of intelligent design often offer flawed analogies and argue for a tautology: namely that intelligent design is unscientific (and hence that it cannot be falsified) while simultaneously offering the assesment that its claims are demonstrably false. This is problematic, as are the unfounded personal attacks that frequently accompany such arguments. (Eg. Jonathan Wells did no experimental research during his post doctoral work at Berkeley.) These points are not an argument for intelligent design as such, but it will certainly appeal to most reader's values about what is fair and reasonable in a debate. The book also discusses some of the advances in physics, the problems associated with the chemical evolution of life, and summarizes the work of such diverse scholars as physicists Paul Davies and Robert Jastrow, and the Chinese paleontologist Jun-Yuan Chen. In doing so, Woodward provides helpful metaphors and generally makes the hard science of these people accessible to the average reader. This is the mark of a very good work of popular science and Woodward should be commended for it, even by readers who do not share his affection for intelligent design.

In the final analysis, however, I am troubled by the persistent war analogy that runs throughout the book. Intelligent Design is an "explosion" on the scientific landscape. Critics respond to it with metaphorical "rockets and mortars." Perhaps this analogy, which actually supports the whole framework of the book, is useful. It may help keep the reader's attention, but I think this approach may actually distorts what really happens in the scientific community. It probably reflects the author's own experience as a naval intelligence officer. My own experience (doctorate in church history) leads me to a rather different analogy. The reaction of some scientists to intelligent design is not so much to go to war as to "ex-communicate" those who dissent with them. Indeed, when I read the writings on evolution of the well known and very talented physicist, Lawrence Krauss, I do not see a general directing troops so much as I see the fourth century bishop Athanasius railing against heresy. It is almost as if "science" and its established "doctrines" are simply beyond question, and those who do so face the condemnation of the "full scientific community" just as Athanasius claimed that those who disagreed with him about the "nature" of Christ were "outside the church." And the problem is, science acts this way even when there are no theological issues at stake. Idaho State University anthropologist Jeffrey Meldum is under attack because he dares to even examine what scant evidence there is for "Bigfoot," a legendary creature that supposedly haunts the northwestern United States. Rather than examine and refute his claims, his critics declare his work "unscientific" and want him expelled from the "church" (ie. academic employment). Jeffrey Schaffer proposes a new interpretation for the formation of Yosemite Valley and is denied a doctorate despite having done more detailed field research than anyone before him. He askes that his critics join him in the field and refute a single claim. They do not even attempt to do. Woodward's book thus touches upon a larger problem with the culture of science in general. Despite public professions of objectivity and "value free" research, much of theoretical science today is in fact highly dogmatic and political. Woodward's wonderful book highlights one of the most glaring examples of this. I highly recommend it to all.

Unlike some of the reviewers (Grayman & T.Makinson)I have actually read the book. I found it to be well written, balanced, and objective. It is also well documented, allowing anyone who desires to do so, to research the subject further. Too many people, especially on the Darwin side of the issue are not really looking at the issues and evidence in order to be informed and objective. They are simply repeating the same old stories they have been taught or heard. If you desire to post a review of a book at least read it first, then try to be honest and objective about it.

In this the second in a series of books, author Tom Woodward sets out to document the battle raging over the Intelligent Design movement. Many have heard about ID in a tangential way, through the media. Now and again fights with Darwinists flare up and reach the popular consciousness. What Dr. Woodward presents is a trenchant documentation of the conflict between Darwinism and the Intelligent Design movement, a battle being waged at many levels behind the scenes. It would seem to belong only in the halls of academia. The reality is that it involves all levels of society, and the stakes are high.

Darwinian evolution is the reigning paradigm in the biological sciences and in fact has affected our cultural thinking in all social spheres. How we think about ourselves, our futures, the education of our children, where our tax dollars go all these questions and many more like them are greatly influenced by the evolutionary model. ID is challenging that paradigm. The evidence of that is set out for the reader in an engaging fashion in this very readable book. This is not a dispassionate correspondence by a casual observer. Rather, Dr. Woodward is clear where his allegiance lies. His enthusiasm comes out on every page. The writing style is clear; the scientific arguments are laid out well, and the insiders view is obvious. I especially appreciated the rhetorical analysis he is able to bring to bear in this discussion. His training as a rhetorician is obvious and is a strength of the work. Resources for further study are discussed. All of this makes for a compelling read to anyone interested in this debate. My interest was piqued to find out more about certain aspects of the debate, for instance, the Cambrian explosion.

His position is, by his own admission biased, yet his treatment of the matter remains fair and respectful. As Thomas Kuhn outlined, challenges to a reigning paradigm are never static, quiet events. Part of the process involves the development of a body of literature which records the interchange between involved parties. The Intelligent Design movement is effectively challenging Darwin's theory of evolution and this book is an important component in that unfolding drama.

I have previously read Dr. Woodward's excellent history of the Intelligent Design Movement (IDM), Doubts About Darwin, and I am also somewhat familiar with what has transpired in the last decade on both sides of this crucial debate. I term it a crucial debate due to the extra-scientific ramifications of its outcome on the cultures of the world.

In Darwin Strikes Back, Woodward not only documents the response of Darwinian evolutionists to the assault in the 1980's and 1990's on their control of the science and education establishments, but he also sets forth the recent scientific evidence that will inevitably lead to the collapse of macroevolution (molecules to man) as a viable hypothesis. While their response to IDM has been somewhat evident through the media's distorted coverage of the debate, the compelling scientific evidence contra Darwinism has not been accurately disclosed to the public. This easy read sets forth with clarity much of that information, utilizing analogies that enable the lay person to easily grasp the scientific information presented.

In chapter five, Woodward revisits Dr. Michael Behe's key 1996 book on irreducible complexity (IC), Darwin's Black Box, which has been under serious assault since it was released. He demonstrates that, despite what the scientific and educational elite would lead you to believe, ten years of critiques of IC and further research have actually strengthened IC as a valid argument that speaks directly to one of Darwin's risky predictions in Origin of Species.

Chapter seven effectively addresses the relatively recent findings regarding the Cambrian "explosion" in the fossil record. Here complex creatures appear fully formed with no precursors and remain virtually unchanged until the present or extinction. Yet Darwin stated in another risky prediction in Origins that the fossil record should be replete with evidence of transitional forms. The Cambrian "explosion" appears to be a powerful refutation of that prediction and Woodward outlines the efforts to address this serious challenge to macroevolution with clarity for the non-scientist.

The missing link discussion may actually be presumptive, as Woodward explains in chapter 12. If microbiology demonstrates the inability of any protein to morph into another, missing links are a moot point. And that's exactly what the recent research set forth in the book demonstrates - that mutation as a method of generating a new multiprotein system is a non-starter.

Woodward's conclusions from the evidence he presents will not please proponents of the Darwinian creation story. I am sure much loud, dismissive rhetoric will be aimed at him and his purported motives in writing this excellent work. However, motives in this arena don't matter, science does. And Darwin Strikes Back makes it clear that, much rhetoric to the contrary not withstanding, Darwinian macroevolution persists in the scientific and educational establishments despite the scientific evidence, not because of it. Perhaps there is more to this battle than the scientific evidence? Regardless of your position on this issue, this is a must read to be current on both sides of the debate.

Thomas Woodward is the leading historian of the Intelligent Design movement and he writes with clarity and understanding about the personalities and issues. He has clearly been in the thick of the debate himself and is superbly qualified to provide this account. He gives fair, though openly partisan, treatment to both sides of the conflict. If you want to get a grip on the subject then this is the book for you.

Another excellent book from Professor Woodward! He is the most knowledgeable and informed historian of the Intelligent Design movement today. No one can understand the movement without reading this well documented work. In reading anti-ID books, I find they make the same clearly disproved mistakes over and over. This is one reason why such books have little impact on ID advocates. To effectively critique a movement one must be well informed and document all assertions. This short work is well documented (the foot notes are on page 195 to 211) and well argued. Although some defense of ID is included, much of the book is a history of the movement covering the period that Woodward's PhD thesis left off at. Woodward covers the slanderous claims of ID critics, such as they want to ruin science, are fundamentalists motivated by religion, are dangerous, and must be stopped at all costs. None of these charges are, Woodward effectively shows, documented. No studies have been done of what the average ID advocate thinks or believes. Until these studies are done, allegations such as the above are irresponsible. Where Woodward does cover the science, he writes on the level of a layperson. In short, this book is an easy read packed full of information and insight.

Woodward is a knowledgeable and, by the standards of these things, folksy in his presentation of the twists and turns in the debates between evolution and intelligent design (ID) over the past ten years, more or less taking off from where he left matters in his last, and equally informative book, `Doubts about Darwin'. Woodward is upfront about his theism, but he is also someone who reads widely and tries to deal with the key events and people himself in person. It's too bad that evolutionists don't have anyone comparable to him. Perhaps it means that evolutionists simply believe that the theory can sell itself.

And maybe it can. As Woodward observes, there are two burdens that ID must shift in the US context. (I stress US because things are different elsewhere in the world.) First, of course, is the dominance of the belief in Darwinian evolution by the majority of scientists considered relevant to an explanation of life on earth. But, equally important is the legal burden that in the US it is possible to disqualify a theory as unscientific, regardless of the credentials of the people or the research done, simply if you can demonstrate religious motivation for its promotion. This is the bigger problem, as I see it, as someone who testified for ID at the recent Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District. (I believe it radically distorts the constitutional `separation of church and state', but that's for another time.) The upside of the story, which Woodward documents, is that ID can be discussed completely and explicitly without making legally proscribed religious appeals.

For readers who are relatively new to the evo-ID debates, one feature of the rhetoric of this book is worth noting. Woodward periodically pauses in his narrative to decry the misrepresentation of ID by various defenders of the evolutionary faith, and even includes an appendix to this effect. It's worth pointing out that misrepresentation, or at least strategic characterization, is common to both sides of this debate. Here Woodward is simply fighting fire with fire. It is inevitable that in a debate as serious as this one both sides will portray each other in the least favourable light. But does this mutual misrepresentation really matter in the long term? Frankly, I don't think so.

The sanest way to deal with the issue is not by the mind-numbing repetition of who said what about whom, which you can find on various blogs endlessly trotted out like pre-programmed chess moves, sometimes (especially in the case of evolutionists) graced with a peanut gallery that would not be out of place in `Beavis and Butthead'. (I guess that's what you get when you take 'self-organization' a little too seriously...) Rather, savvy readers should look at subtle shifts in position over time, both substantive and rhetorical, that both sides make. And both sides have indeed made quite significant shifts in how they argue their case over the last quarter century. If ID has done nothing else, it has helped evolutionists to smarten up their act and curb their terminal smugness. And ID, to its credit, does not introduce the Bible as evidence. `Darwin Strikes Back' and Woodward's earlier book, `Doubts about Darwin' give a pretty fair record from a participant-observer standpoint of the various twists and turns in the debate.

Readers of Woodward's book should pick up a copy of the DVD, `Unlocking the Mystery of Life', whose making he describes. It is probably the most sophisticated filmic treatment of ID yet, and would make for challenging viewing in a high school biology class. While some of the people involved in this film may have religious motives, they're never given expression. We are reaching a point where the merits (or not) of ID can be discussed without reference to politically controversial motives, just as we can do likewise for evolution without introducing sensitive matters like racial hygiene and eugenics, which were very much part of the history of Darwinism, independently of its actual scientific validity.

Darwin Strikes Back is a helpful book for those seeking to understand the debate about evolution and intelligent design. One of the main thrusts of the book is to show atmosphere between both sides. Woodward makes clear that questionable rhetoric is being used by the pro-evolutionist camp to stifle debate and cloud the issues surrounding: 1) the major loopholes with current evolutionary theory; 2) "design theory" being an acceptable form of empiricism in the scientific community.

The first 65 pages provide a fast moving and informative historical overview of the intelligent design movement. The next 100 pages, though more technical, are equally informative. It lays out some of the underlying paradigms of design theory, including the concept of "irreducible complexity" in describing the cell, and the "explanatory filter." This second development is a new and fascinating mathematical paradigm that further points to a designing agent for life as we know it. The final portion of the book ponders the future of science and includes "reasons for the inevitable decline of Darwinism" (177) made by Woodward.

There are some common threads throughout the book. As noted earlier, one of Woodward's main points is to show that those who oppose ID are sometimes arguing with circular logic regarding evolution's position as a viable theory. The point is also made that there are many irrelevant counterclaims to ID's growth as a viable theory.

When Woodward delves into some of the deeper concepts, he does so in a way that allows the novice reader to get a grasp of what is being presented. He often makes things "easier" by providing helpful analogies. Those who have forgotten the basics (in all areas science) will be enjoyably enlightened by such a new and vivid presentation of "textbook science terminology" found in DSB.

It is also worth mentioning that Woodward points out how current evolutionary thought doesn't exactly match Darwin's traditional evolutionary model. These neo-Darwinists even go so far as to make Darwin's theory in some places completely non-Darwinian. This is seen especially in Woodward's chapter on fossil evidence that strongly points against macro-evolution. This chapter on fossils also points to a common theme in the book: the neo-Darwinist bent to make the facts fit the theory as opposing to letting the facts dictate what the theory should be.

READERS BEWARE! People who hate the concept of evolution being FALSE post negative reviews. THEY did not READ THIS BOOK nor do they know anything about Intelligent Design. These Darwinists find books on the Intelligent Design and put one star next to them to intentionally lower it's rating. They than post a negative comment about Intelligent Design, which is all opinion based and say nothing about the actual content within the book.

This book has been reviewed pretty well and pretty thoroughly by several other reviewers, so I'm not going to be adding a lot, but I wanted to contribute a little here. As others have stated, this is mostly a history of the ID movement, and necessarily contains an expose, if you will, of the problems both with Darwinism and with his more fanatical followers. As shown in the new documentary by Ben Stein, a lot of people seem much more interested in ending debate than in discovering truth- using the Al Gore logic that the debate is over, so any disagreement amounts to an attack on Science itself. The problems with this are not too difficult to enumerate, and he does a good job at letting the facts speak for themself.

I liked his pointing out that Behe's Black Box was such a key work that ratcheted up the quality and rigor of the debate, as this confirmed a personal observation, and many of the other books he picked as important, such as Icons of Evolution, were ones that I respect as well. I also liked getting an outline of the "struggle" as well as a bit of analysis of why it exists at all and why it has taken some of the turns it has taken. Very insightful.

In summary, a good history- including information about pro-Darwin books that have made cases and even pointed out places where ID arguments need refinement of further development. I'm sure it will be called biased, and I'm sure it is in a way, but it is not malicious or snarky by and large, and is well worth adding to your library in order to gain a helpful overview of the Design Wars.