Customer Reviews

Intelligent Design 101: Leading Experts Explain the Key Issues

5 star:		(8)
4 star:		(5)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(3)

 

 

The debate over whether or not our universe was designed with a purpose is one that centers not around philosophical questions but over "competing scientific explanations of the data". That is the central argument expounded by Phillip Johnson in Intelligent Design 101, a book that aims to bring into sharp focus the central tenets of the intelligent design (ID) movement. Contrary to a popular misconception, the modern day controversy over design in biology is not one that arose from some push to force Judeo-Christian beliefs into the science classroom. It is instead one that extends back thousands of years to the time of Plato and Xenophon in ancient Greece.

Today the educational literature defines all aspects of biology in purely naturalistic terms. What is more, evolution has become the "monolithic fact" that we must all embrace. Even though there is incontrovertible evidence that defies such a factual status, evolutionists have bent over backwards to make naturalism fill in the glaring inconsistencies in the data. As a vociferous opponent of the macro-evolutionary aspects of Darwinism, Johnson has attempted a "divide and conquer" approach to break such a stronghold. By separating philosophical naturalists such as Richard Dawkins from scientists with a sound objective outlook, Johnson's much-publicized Wedge Strategy has sought to prize neo-Darwinism away from its "pedestal of philosophical naturalism". Attacks on Johnson's initiative have focused on the religious backgrounds of its supporters rather than on the sound scientific arguments that they put forward. Still, as Johnson remarks those who today maintain that ID is all about religion ignore the counter claim that the theory of evolution is not exactly all about science.

Addressing this point in a later chapter of the book, philosopher J.P Moreland re-emphasizes a long-standing denial- ID makes no theological commitments to Christianity, Hinduism, Islam or any other religion and does not set us on a "slippery slope" of religious interference of science. Instead ID has scientific legitimacy evidenced by the observation that those who argue against it do so by attempting to falsify its scientific claims.

What are the scientific foundations upon which ID stands? Geologist and lawyer Casey Luskin, biochemist Michael Behe and philosopher Jay Richards remind us of the widely-disseminated ID arguments in their respective chapters of Intelligent Design 101. Complex information-rich objects such as those that lead to the inference of intelligent activity in archaeology and forensic science also exist in the molecular world. Behe builds on Luskin's platform by treating us to an exposition of how irreducible complexity in nano-molecular machines continues to present "a conundrum for Darwinism". Richards then gives us a comprehensive rebuttal of the materialistic interpretation of the Copernican principle challenging science popularizer and television celebrity Carl Sagan's assumption that "the universe is all there is" and listing the features that are necessary for a habitable planet such as our earth to exist. Rather than being winners of a "grand cosmic lottery", our earth's habitability coupled with its prime 'real estate' position for making scientific discoveries argue in favor of design and purpose.

Evolutionary stalwart Julian Huxley famously opened the centennial of the publication of The Origin Of Species with the proclamation that naturalistic evolution explained the totality of life's existence. Nevertheless the more recent struggles between creationists on whether the universe is thousands or billions of years old have done little to quell the rising tide of scientists who feel uncomfortable with the Darwinian endpoint. In Johnson's assessment ID has become the umbrella movement that unites "people of many viewpoints who were once divided on side issues". Today there exists a tremendous dissatisfaction with the Darwinian synthesis amongst reputable scientists who are unconvinced by the supposedly unarguable evidence that Darwinists hold on to. Within such a setting, Johnson equates his volume Darwin On Trial to "a match that lit the tinder beneath a stockpile of logs".

In his chapter entitled Philosophical Implications Of Neo-Darwinism and Intelligent Design, philosopher Eddie Colanter brings to the reader's attention the religious undertones of the so-called strong form of Neo-Darwinism which holds that (i) all of life is the product of purely materialistic forces, (ii) any reference to God is superfluous and (iii) any moral values that humans place on their comportment are purely arbitrary and subjective (this latter point has important ramifications for how we view contemporary social issues such as abortion, euthanasia and the definition of personhood).

Intelligent Design 101 then concludes with a broad overview of the historical landscape upon which ID has made its impact. What is made explicit is that ID is not simply a modern extension of the Christian creationism that featured in prominent legal cases such as those surrounding the Tennessee anti-evolution laws of the 1970s. In the words of distinguished theologian H Wayne House, it is a movement that carries with it an "empirical method of argument [and a] lack of allusion to the fundamentalist wing of Christianity and Christian theology".

As we approach Darwin day with its accompanying festivities and plans to parade his namesake through museum halls across the nation, we cannot ignore the vast body of evidence that today is feeding the ID counter-attack. Intelligent Design 101 is an invaluable resource for those seeking to understand the twisted fables of the anti-ID lobby. If those who oppose ID have nothing to fear, they should be prepared to entertain competing points of view and to let truth and reason become "the final arbiters".

I found this book to be a clear and helpful presentation of the evidence for the theory of Intelligent Design, and the nature of science. Unlike the emotional, and often irrational, reviews by some found on this page, that resemble scientism rather than science, Intelligent Design 101 argues that the universe is best explained by reference to some type of designer. The authors do not identify the designer, though I would suspect that most believe in the God of Christianity; nonetheless the argument does not rest on belief in the Christian God, but could be one accepted in different religions, and even in Greek philosophy.

I recommend this book as a thoughtful introduction to the scientific, philosophical and legal aspects of the current debate on intelligent design of the universe versus the belief that something may arise from nothing.

The point of this book is to give a short primer on the subject. Hence the "101" in the title. The authors that contributed to it (as any non-activist ID opposer familiar with their work knows) present intelligent, debatable arguments for their positions. Phillip Johnson, J.P. Moreland and Michael Behe are far from narrow minded fundamentalists. The positions and arguments they make here present significant challenges to scientific materialism. Those challenges are not defeated by quick dismissals or name calling.

If a person subscribes to the view that science cannot even suggest design in the universe, that's alright. They disagree with the authors, who by the way are saying that it merely suggests design. But to label the authors as mere creationists trying to get God back in schools (or worse), they do a strong disservice to the concept of scientific debate, and in fact partake in the narrow minded, dogmatic practices they accuse others of.
Of course there are many other highly esteemed scientists (in non-dogmatic circles) who are proponents of ID who did not write for this particular book. But their reasons for supporting ID are just as strong, valid and maybe even stronger than the ones presented here. But again, the point of this book is to give a short primer on the subject.
For the life of me I cannot understand the rabid, froth-mouthed opposition to any pro-ID person or argument out there. And the opposition says that ID proponents are the intolerant ones. It's astounding. Astounding and sad.

Many scientists of good will read rationally reasoned books like "Intelligent Design 101" and claim that such ideas will lead to state sponsored religion. One must ask, which religion? Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Bahai, Hinduism? Who is the designer, the great architect?
Sadly, for such well intended people, religion makes up a major part of their lives, that is, their rejection of some religion from their past hampers their ability to reason or process new ideas. It is my hope that these well meaning people will be able to get over their religious obsessions in order to be able to embrace the information age.

I was very pleased with my order of the book, Intelligent Design 101. I ordered it for a science course I am taking on creationism v. evolution. It is a very interesting read and fairly presents both sides of the issue.

I think that this book is an excellent introduction to the subject of intelligent design. With the overview of evolution being mostly taught in the classrooms, this theory is overlooked as a viable option. Most of the media spread lies about how ID works, and it clouds the judgment of this subject. This book does a good job at explaing the key concepts of ID. Most of the people who are against ID often insult the subject before learning the subject, and it is not religion.

This book makes understanding intelligent design(ID) as a science so easy. My world was rocked as I discovered that even some of my own assumptions of ID were false and generally media driven. Leaders of various fields of study, from top biologists to widely recognized lawyers, share their perspectives on ID in reference to each of their fields. It is very well written and very easy to understand. If you have any interest what-so-ever in getting a brief on the truth about ID then you need to read and start with this book.

For those seeking more familiarity regarding the 'evolution war', this is a good place to start. This overview of the evidence encapsulates key points that are often overlooked or debunked by critics, and presents evidence to back the claims of ID, which state that "certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, rather than an undirected process such as natural selection." Unfortunately, them's fightin' words. How so? A Darwinian world view now dominates the classroom, funding organizations, the popular press, and even the courts. Some say that to question certain tenets neoDarwinism (NDE), is to attack science. It's stated here that quite possibly the reverse is true. So how has this debate come to be, progressed, and as of late, stumbled? This book will help bring you up to date.

Phillip Johnson briefly chronicles the unfolding of the debate in recent times, and of the formation of organizations that opposed the Darwinian basic premise of natural causation. Many of these groups fought among themselves as well, over religious differences. Scientists, then and now, point to those motives as the reason for their opposition to NDE. True to an extent, but today's opposition is more science based, as Johnson points out.

To summarize the political nature of the ongoing engagement, he discusses the court cases, then goes on to define his current 'wedge strategy', defining it as a wedge of truth, rather than religion as some critics have defined it.

J.P. Moreland stresses philosophical issues, not that philosophy is necessarily germane to science, but because science uses philosophical arguments, and uses them improperly to refute Intelligent Design. He goes on to discuss at length predictions, explanatory power, either empirical or conceptual, and if conceptual, internal or external (where an external, rational belief need be considered), and so on.

Moreland's entire thesis, I would say, are critiques of what is testable, what is not, what is rational, or what might be considered circular reasoning, and the pros and cons of various ways to assess the evidence. Given the constraints that are imposed on scientific consensus, he makes an excellent case that changes in the progression of biologic systems can be more logically explained by intervention, i.e. Intelligent Design, and can thus be supported.

Casey Luskin discusses the dilemma of finding Intelligent Design in nature, and does so on many fronts, most interesting perhaps, the study of DNA and its complexity. It is often stated that there are no peer reviewed articles attesting to design, a teleological inference, and yet Luskin cites a recent article in Cell Biology International, explaining that such a form of integrated complexity [DNA coding] could not arise by natural processes, regardless of how much time is allowed. Another paper cited challenges Darwinian mechanisms, ascribing the requirement of "large quantities of prescriptive information", and that "[it] requires 'choice contingency' rather than 'chance contingency' or necessity." The foundational evolutionary principal of chance and/or necessity is hereby effectively challenged, and in a peer review journal.

Several other topics make this chapter one of the best I've seen for explaining ID, and how it is logically placed within biosystems. Micromachines are discussed, including the cellular flagellum, and rather than being 'unspun', as biologist Kenneth Miller has stated in a 2004 paper, "it is still spinning just fine" (a quote from Wm. Dembski's response to the paper, with input from Casey Luskin). Is co-option of multi-use proteins, along with horizontal or lateral transfer adequate to explain how totally new cell machinery arises? In this chapter, the arguments and counterarguments are well summarized.

Biosystematics, the study of taxonomic relationships, how they arose, and how they function is discussed at length (~ ten pages) to conclude the chapter. Transitional forms, morphological patterns, isolation, convergence, extinction, punctuated equilibrium are discussed, and you should come away with an excellent overview of both sides, and their relative merits. My take: Adaptive evolution may well be a 'designed in' function.

Michael Behe takes on irreducible complexity, the eye, the flagellum, and the clotting system. Although Darwinist defenders like to claim that the eye evolved from a light sensitive patch, an evolved cup, an evolved retinal surface, a pinhole lense to a variable refractive lense, and with aiming, focusing, and focal length adjusters thrown in, and to postulate these changes occurred through natural selection of genetic mistakes, Michael disagrees. While not touching on all of these areas, he cogently deflates the patch to a matrix cup fallacy. His description of the highly complex light detecting process, shows that it is sophistry to conflate vision with a purported ascendant light sensitive patch, merely because these crude forms exist in nature.

To conclude, he discusses the blood clotting cascade, and Russell Doolittle's counter augments, based on a case study of mice which lacked two of the needed clotting factors. Doolittle's claim was that removal of those two factors was not harmful to the host, showed evidence of redundancy in the process, and pointed to random causation. Behe argues for IC, discredits Doolittle's conclusions, and pokes fun at a copy and paste article by Michael Ruse regarding Doolittle's case study.

The concluding essays by Jay Richards and Eddie Colanter cover the philosophical, theological and historical aspects of man's view of himself and of nature, and do it effectively. The final chapter by Wayne House delves into legal issues that will continue to confront the ID movement. Also included is 'A Reply to Francis Collins' Darwinian Arguments for Common Ancestry of Apes and Humans', by Casey Luskin and Logan Gage. Forty pages of footnote references are also included.

I would classify this book as recommended reading for anyone new to the subject, as well as for journalists, pundits and literary critics who will benefit by gaining a more honest and objective overview of the basics, than from most of what's out there currently in the popular press.

This book is a great start for anyone intrested in learning about ID. It points out much evidences from a range of different fields and there leading experts that point to a Creator. This book also informs you of the different views that are against ID. After you are finished reading "intelliget design 101" you should have a strong knowledge of what ID is all about. I strongly recommend this book to anyone wanting to know were the facts lead.

Having conducted a number of seminars in the past regarding the various Christian views on cosmology and biological origins myself, I was most interested in reading this book. I know or have met in the past a few of the contributors, as well as the editor, personally, therefore my interest in the book was more than just academic. I found this book to be perhaps the most comprehensive of all works involving the Intelligent Design movement to date. This anthology of articles collected by Wayne House covers, I believe, the salient issues that define this remarkable phenomenon of modern science. If anyone wants a first-rate introduction into the origins and progress of this fascinating movement, then this is the place to start. The articles are very well written, and Dr. House has done a stellar job in collecting and editing them so as to be appreciated by the specialist as well as the neophyte.

As a young earth creationist, however, I am concerned at the level of involvement in this movement by men who I know to be committed Christians. The Christian apologetical value for the ID movement is nil, in my humble opinion, since it consciously avoids any association with the Creator--the Christian God, the Father of Jesus Christ. It wants, rather, to "follow the evidence," and not to be committed to identifying any supernatural (or alien??) agent. But what possible apologetical value for a Christian could there be in this sort of enterprise? Since the evidence is the same for both Christian and Evolutionist, it is not, then, the quantity or quality of the evidence that is the issue, but one's maxims, or presuppositions, that is doing the work as we all look at the evidence we all have at our disposal. Although I laud the quality of the writing and the cogency of the arguments presented, I still must distance myself from a movement that will not acknowledge the only Creator with Whom we have to do.