Customer Reviews

God, the Devil, and Darwin: A Critique of Intelligent Design Theory

5 star:		(14)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(8)

 

 

After introducing his book by situating intelligent design theory in the context of resurgent religious fundamentalism, Shanks discusses traditional design arguments for the existence of God and early critical reactions (e.g., those of Hume and Kant) to them. This discussion provides background for the rest of the book.

In chapter 2 Shanks examines Darwin's response to the traditional biological version of the argument from design, as well as his views of religion. Shanks also presents key developments in evolutionary biology since Darwin, including the impact of genetics and recent research bringing together issues in evolution with issues in developmental biology.

In chapter 3 Shanks attends to the Second Law of Thermodynamics. He contends that errors about the meaning of the Second Law pervade creationist writings. He also argues that non-equilibrium thermodynamics has revealed how natural mechanisms can result in self-organization, by which physical systems organize themselves into complex, highly ordered states. Thus, Shanks contends, in addition to evolutionary mechanisms studied by biologists, there are other natural sources of ordered complexity working in the universe.

Supernatural science is the subject of chapter 4. Shanks emphasizes that, typically, scientists do not reject the possibility of supernatural causation; they do not presently take it seriously because of a lack of convincing evidence. To sharpen the issues here, Shanks examines some recent attempts to introduce supernatural causes into medicine, namely, with respect to the efficacy of prayer as effective therapy. He points out that such studies are relevant because they are serious attempts to gather evidence in favor of supernatural causation.

In chapter 5 Shanks presents some recent and influential biochemical arguments put forward by Michael Behe and others to justify the conclusion of intelligent design. Shanks argues that irreducible complexity, the centerpiece of these arguments, could have evolved.

Shifting his focus from biology to cosmology, in chapter 6 Shanks focuses on arguments for the conclusion of intelligent design that proceed from the nature of the universe and from anthropic principle cosmology in particular. He argues that the cosmological design arguments are inconclusive.

In the concluding chapter, Shanks briefly discusses science, morality, and God. He points out that intelligent design theorists are part of a movement which has a social agenda which goes well beyond science education. By contrast, Shanks argues that Darwin himself provides a way of thinking about morality which fits well with the democratic values which are our common inheritance from the Enlightenment. Shanks states that finally his book is about the Enlightenment and its enemies and about the choices we will all have to make, not just about science, but about life itself: how we want to live, how we want society to be structured, how we want to see the future unfold.

The book concludes with a rich glossary and bibliography.

Shanks has written a fine book. It is quite timely, immensely informative, logically rigorous, well-documented, and a pleasure to read. As nearly as I (a retired philosophy professor) can tell, this is cutting edge stuff, clearly presented. Anyone interested in creationism, intelligent design, or (at least if one is a layperson) just plain contemporary evolutionary biology or cosmology, or concerned to preserve us from the rabid forces of religious obscurantism, would benefit from reading this excellent book. With a mere 246 pages of text, it is a succinct tour de force.

First, the good. Shanks does an effective job of accurately summarizing the scientific the arguments supporting evolution by natural selection. He does this in ways that are mostly accessible to readers whether they have a background in sciences (biology, chemistry, or physics) or not. Likewise, the reader can see the weaknesses of ID as so much arm-waving. He does this by grounding his arguments in the scientific method of hypothesis testing, so that there can be no (real, substantial) argument that scientists are rejecting ID out-of-hand because they don't like it. The new ingredient to Shanks' book is the philosophical grounding of his arguments. He argues that arguments for ID are based on the metaphors we use to understand abstract ideas like the development of organisms and other complex systems, and makes an effective case that the "life as a machine" metaphor obstructs our understanding of, and critical thinking about, how life could evolve.

Now for the not-so-good. It seems that any good argument should define what it is arguing for and against. Shanks never tells us as much, unless one consults the glossary (to which the text does not refer). This could potentially weaken further arguments through the very mis-interpretation he spends much of the book lamenting. (So for example, biological evolution is change in allele frequencies of a population over time.) It's also clear that Shanks is well-versed in the philosophical foundations of the anti-science of IDers, but his descriptions and explanations are muddled in a way that suggests he has not spent enough time (or had a good enough editor) reviewing how the common person knows what she knows. The chapters themselves progress logically, but the organization within the chapters is sometimes hard to follow and circuitous, a curious breakdown in a book by a philosopher.

Finally, I was disappointed that such a strong work, overall, suffers from what seemed to me as self-sabotage. Early in the book, Shanks identifies himself as someone who does not believe in a deity. This reader took it as a courageous declaration of the author's point of view, which purpose was the make sure readers suffer no ambiguity about his point of view. (Other readers, no doubt, will interpret it as the devil himself setting pen to paper, but this book is not written for minds permanently closed.) I'm afraid, though, that between that declaration and other, rather pointed jabs at IDers, that Shanks weakens the "punch" of what is otherwise a succinct and powerful volume. I'd also suggest that what was missing for me from this, and other, volumes about creationism and ID is more of an exploration about what such people and groups think and how they got that way -- beyond the obvious explanation that many/most IDers believe that a deity created the world we experience. I'm afraid that for all its strengths, this book lapses into what IDers and many other will take as yet another arrogant proclamation for evolution and against deities, and that's just not where the cheese is. We scientists owe it to people to inform, which Shanks does quite well, but we'd do better to keep our literate put-downs to ourselves if we hope to engage people in this rally to save critical thinking.

Professor Shanks has done somebody a real service here in painstakingly demonstrating the utter intellectual poverty of so-called "intelligent design theory." Just who that person is I don't know. Perhaps it's a US congressman. Most people I know either haven't a clue about the subject, or are rationalists and are well aware that the intelligent design argument is scientifically vacuous and actually a religious power play, or they are religious true believers themselves and uncritically accept the notion that the universe was designed by a supernatural being whom they call God.

In other words, all the close and detailed analysis done by Shanks in this book--and trust me, he really addresses the question in the most thorough way--isn't about to persuade anybody one way or the other. Most people won't--and could not even if they tried--read it. It is entirely too finely meshed in technical detail about matters of no particular interest to them: cosmology, quantum mechanics, probability theory, biochemistry, thermodynamics, etc. Yet the book had to be written just for the record, one might say. All the pseudoscience served up by the creationists and the intelligent designers needed to be answered thoroughly, and Shanks has done that in a most impressive manner.

Shanks takes the intelligent designers seriously and presents their arguments, and then, piece by piece, refutes them. Frankly, I believe he gives them more attention than they deserve. After all, how seriously can one take a man (leading intelligent design theorist, William Dembski, for example) who writes: "My thesis is that all disciplines find their completion in Christ and cannot be properly understood apart from Christ" (quoted on page 157)? I mean, isn't it enough to just quote such a person? He's a true believer and all his "arguments" are merely attempts to justify his belief in a supernatural being and supernatural causation. No amount of counter argument from logic or scientific experiment or from the multitudinous conclusions of the various sciences is going to sway him one iota.

But of course Shanks is not aiming his arguments at Dembski or his colleagues. Rather, like the good teacher he is, Shanks wants it spelled out for his students and for students everywhere just how absurd and wanting is the case for intelligent design. He is writing for those not yet entirely corrupted by religious propaganda and as yet innocent of the weight of the scientific evidence.

Why, one might ask, are the religious fundamentalists so intent on attacking Darwinism? Is it because they are uncomfortable with being closely related to apes, as were the Victorians? They probably are, but the real reason is that "Darwin's theory of evolution can be viewed as a sustained refutation of the argument from design..." (p. 24) Before evolution it was a mighty mystery as to how species arose, and any argument was as good as another, with the hoary argument from design being especially agreeable; and therefore pronouncements from the clergy held not only psychological, social and political sway over the masses, but intellectual sway as well. Darwinism changed all that, with the result that the Church lost an enormous amount of power and prestige--power and prestige that it has been desperately trying to regain ever since.

Noteworthy is the fine introduction by Richard Dawkins who has fought long and hard himself against the stupidities of the creationists and intelligent designers. Note well his sharp and decisive tone: "Intelligent Design 'theory' is pernicious nonsense which needs to be neutralized before irreparable damage is done to American education." (p. x)

That really is the bottom line. All that we have learned from science and rationalism is under attack from the forces of ignorance, mostly right-wing religious fundamentalists who would substitute their authoritarian mumble-jumble for reality in an attempt to seize the reigns of political power and usher in a return to the Dark Ages with themselves at the throne. Professor Shanks is to be commended for his efforts to prevent such a catastrophe, as unlikely as such a catastrophe might be.

An excellent book which I enthusiastically recommend to anyone interested in the present "intelligent design" anti-evolution movement. In fact, my recommendation has a touch of envy -- I have written on ID myself, and when reading Shanks, I often found myself wishing I had found such a good way to express what's wrong with ID.

I also notice there are a number of uncalled-for and anonymous attacks on the book posted here. I read these as further recommendations for the book. It obviously has touched a nerve among some ID supporters at least. Perhaps some will be prompted to go beyond vituperation and reply to ID's critics with some scientific substance, showing how ID provides a better explanation of complexity than what mainstream natural scientists are accustomed to. I doubt that this is going to happen, but it would be the more appropriate response. Shanks has presented a very good explanation of why ID has not been able to challenge mainstream science; that judgment will stand as long as ID proponents present complaints about exclusion rather than scientific substance.

Mr. Reader-from-Ann-Arbor offers himself as an expert on cell biology as well as ID and its supposed insights. He ought presumably to know that public critiques by serious scientists do not appear anonymously or over pseudonyms. Let him identify himself so that we may scrutinize his contributions, if any, to the literature, and to peer-reviewed literature especially. Otherwise his assertions of expert knowledge are worthless dissembling.

For the rest, his indignant denial that the ID movement is a product of a Fundamentalist strategy is hokum. Check this against the record of godfather PE Johnson.

I also urge, in general, that Amazon simply stop tolerating anonymous reviews, whatever the book or topic. Put your name where your mouth is or shut the hell up.

A must read for anyone interested in the creation evolution debate or scientific education in general. This is the most informative and well-written book on the current manifestation of the creation evolution controversy that I have read. Dr Shanks has written a book that not only addresses the concept of Intelligent Design but that makes points applicable to the creation evolution debate in general. Shanks debunks the arguments from Anthropic coincidences, irreducible complexity, entropy and others areas. He contrasts the arguments creationist's make with those that have come down from the Enlightenment. My favorite chapter was the last one where Shanks fully exposes the wedge strategy of the creationists. Those concerned about policy-making in the US will also appreciate this book.

It is a strange paradox that the nation producing the most Nobel Prize winners has also spawned the loudest voices denouncing science and its revelations. Unlike those who object to weapons research or who claim science doesn't address life's daily problems, the objections are even more fundamental. The disaffection is a reaction to science's exposure of humanity being an integral part of Nature - "Darwinism". The active crusaders in this assault can be counted on the fingers of one hand, but they have been prolific and boisterous in their assertions. And they are declaring war on education. They want changes based on religious grounds. Shanks' counterattack on these destructive forces carefully examines and dissects the arguments asserting life has supernatural origins.

The campaign, which has gone through several aliases - "Christian creationism" and "creation science" are but two - has settled on the bizarre cognomen of "Intelligent Design". This concept rests on a view of today's life. It is then projected back in time and found too difficult to explain. According to ID, we can't get there from here. Life is too complex to have built up from simple beginnings and must be the work of an anonymous "designer", which, of course, means something spiritual. Shanks is direct in his condemnation of this notion. Quite apart from the vapid logic of ID's idea is the failure of its adherents to provide a shred of evidence for their thesis. It is a shambles of inconsistent views, he demonstrates, often contradictory and its adherents often at cross-purposes. Shanks' granting it the status of a "theory" is the one shortcoming in this book.

After a brief outline of ID's ancient roots and its proponents in the Muslim world - a novel point overlooked by most scholars - Shanks outlines his themes. He divides his topics into the realms of biological and cosmological ID views. The biological is, of course, ID's challenge to Darwin's natural selection concept. It's difficult to comprehend how anyone could reject the mass of evidence supporting Darwin's idea that have accumulated since "Origin" was published, but Shanks demonstrates how ID publicists attempt to refute or ignore it. ID has used the laws of thermodynamics as a bludgeon against natural selection, but Shanks explains the flaws in its arguments. He deftly exposes the inconsistencies and self-contradictions that ID spokesmen have produced. Michael Behe's circular debates with Shanks and his colleague Karl Joplin are revealed to be as mistaken as they were in his sadly best selling book. The works of Behe's cohorts Phillip Johnson and William Dembski are carefully dissected and their mistakes exposed in raw vividness. They engage in much special pleading, but Shanks counters with gifted eloquence.

Perhaps the most far-reaching attempt to project ID is what has become known as the "anthropic principle". This idea has caught the imagination of those who recognise evolution has produced the human species. However, as any cognitive scientist will concede, humans have a unique place in nature. Our level of consciousness and linguistic abilities lead us to view ourselves in ways different from other animals. Frank Tipler and John Barrow have proposed that human evolution, unlike any other species, isn't destined to go extinct. Instead we will continue to evolve indefinitely. Shanks, who describes this idea as a "grotesque science fantasy", is understandably dismissive of something so counter to biological reality.

The main thrust of ID has always been the introduction of the supernatural as the driving force of life. Shanks repeated theme is the failure to provide supportive evidence for this claim. While there are those who contend deities aren't discernible, Shanks nods to their concerns, but demonstates lucidly that the processes of the universe and life are measureable. It is these very topics which the ID clique is attempting to overthrow in American public schools, a tactic Shanks seeks to block. ID's thesis that "materialism" erodes "moral values" are exposed in Shanks' conclusion. This device is no more than a scare tactic that characterises Darwin and all evolutionary biologists, paleoanthropologists, cosmologists and other researchers as "agents of Satan" in Henry Morris' terms. It is hoped that this book will provide an effective counter to such depictions. [stephen a. haines - Ottawa, Canada]

The present "theory" of Intelligent Design is more sophisticated than that of the New Earth Creationists. ID advocates cannot be dismissed as easily by basic science in geology, carbon dating, or physics. The learning curve in order to adequatedly understand nuances in evolution and biochemistry is steep. Shanks takes the above fields, adds thermodynamics, anthropomorphism and cosmology, and challenges ID in this book. For the non science oriented readers, it's a little deep. Of course, the ID books by Behe (one of the 3 main ID advocates) are also deep and his biochemistry seems accurate (till he gets to "irreducible complexity"). It just takes more than one's first read on this subject in order to figure out who is gilding the lily.

The stakes are high because the eventual goal is enforcement of religious opinions on the educational system. If just a little bit of ID can be "wedged in" and get equal time with evolution in high school, later it can be broadened...eventually "evil and materialistic" theories such as evolution might be omitted altogether.

Now a word or two about the scientific method: In order to qualify as a science, first data is gathered. A Hypothesis based on the data is formulated. The hypothesis is tested and results are published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal. The hypothesis, if it passes muster so far, is subjected to re-testing by other scientists with verification of the results. The hypothesis describes "how" a process works but says nothing about "why." A Theory may eventually be developed which explains why and has a stronger meaning in science than the usual dictionary definition. To become a theory indicates general acceptance by the scientific community, may be the end result of decades or even centuries of groundwork. This theory is always susceptible to modification or even rejection if new data demands it. This is the scientific method that helped bring us out of the Dark Ages. Any hypothesis or theory that is not subjected to this stringent method of inquiry does not belong in science class.

Shanks gives ID more credence than I would. Research for ID consists of careful perusal of the scientific literature, hoping to isolate quotes, ideas or disagreements amongst scientists that can then be misinterpreted to support ID arguments. This is not scientific theory testing. ID involves an unidentified designer who intervenes at inspecified crossroads in evolution and there is nothing available to test - but then religion is supposed to be about faith and not evidence.

Interestingly, advocates of Christianity tried over and over to have direct support for their faith placed in the US Constitution. Repeatedly, they were turned down by the founding fathers, many of whom had gone through a few rounds of witch trials earlier in their lives. King George III had tried to dictate to them the only acceptable forms of worship, making them hair-trigger sensitive to issues of separation of church and state. Trying to obtain by legislation, decree, or the sword that which cannot be obtained by evangelism has a long history within our species.

Back to the book, Shanks tells us more about thermodynamics than I really want to know, and he is just as thorough in the other chapters. For the short cut version, consider just the excellent foreward by Dawkins, and the introductory and summary chapters by Shanks. If you want more, it is there and is very well done. I congratulate Niall Shanks on his very excellent, timely and much needed book. Highly recommended!

A very readable overview of the incorrect interpretations of science that I.D. theorists use to further their own hypotheses. Anyone who has been taken in by the self-proclaimed "scientific theories" of I.D. would do well to read this book. In contrast with [seemingly most well-known] other books in the "Intelligent Design Is Flawed" category, this one generally focuses less on biologial evolution and more on violations of physical laws.

Having purchased (at the same time) and reviewed Dembsky's The Design Revolution, I didn't bother to review at that time Niall Shank's book, which to me was a straight forward and enjoyable read. I was not previously aware of the ID "fight" or "debate" and the political/educational overtones therein. But now being an avid reader, I enjoy the Amazon reviews and have been surprised at the vehemence of the Pro-IDers. There responses remind me of the Islamic fundamentalists and Turkish readers who deny there was an Armenian Holocaust.

As a former Physics student (BA, 1967), I studied science almost as a philosophy ... just wanting to know a bit about "reality". I found the beauty, art and elegance of science to be a comfortable and rewarding experience, though I never worked beyond a year in a weapons laboratory ... moving on to other areas of education and pursuits. What has made me "sad", having become marginally aware of the ID controversy, is the waste of time and effort by scientists (writers and educators) to contend with defending or deflecting the specious arguements and political/educational agenda being foisted by the clearly fundamentalist mindset, in this case Judeo/Christian it seems. With time and money for education and research never adequate, this ideological attack by the ID believers adds unnecessarily more "sadness" to a troubled body-politic. Eric Hoffer's The True Believer is as apt today as it was when I read it 40 years ago.

Niall Shank's book brought back some of the pleasant memories of science and "searching" of my youth.