It's a bit depressing, seeing a man of global outlook having to produce a book of such limited audience. Kitcher's philosophical study is an excellent summation of the false ideas forwarded by anti-Darwin forces in the US. His approach is a needed one, that "creationists" of various stripes there must be addressed in rational terms, and on their own ground. He accomplishes the task with extraordinary skill and reserve. It's a badly-needed book, but it's a pity is that this is so. It's to be hoped Kitcher's well-reasoned techniques applied here will reach a significant portion of that targeted readership.
His approach is to categorise the themes of creationist writers as regards the value of the "science" they purport to espouse. He puts creationists in three basic forms: "Genesis" - the biblical "literalists"; "novelty" - special acts of creation by some supernatural interference; and the "anti-selectionists" - composed of the newer "Intelligent Design" advocates. "Anti-selectionism" has found a niche by contesting the concept of the Tree of Life, the graphic representation of gradual change in organisms over time to produce new forms. It isn't evolution itself these writers contest, but the details not readily explained by what we know now. Aimless mutations aren't enough to explain the complexity of some elements in certain organisms, they argue. Some undetectable "force" must be involved. The first two forms are adhered to by sincere, if dogmatic followers. The third is one that must be considered on the evidence under study. That consideration must adhere to the rules of scientific investigation to be valid.
Kitcher understands that the challenge of the anti-selectionists isn't based on scientific, but on cultural, values. He recognises that the real agenda of "Intelligent Design" is to give religious people a way to grasp Darwin's concept within a framework of supernatural forces. They have been forced to concede that "young-Earth" biblical creation is untenable. They also recognise that "special creations" aren't supported by the fossil or genetic record. The only way to allow their deity a means of keeping its hand in is to give some tampering power. Bacterial flagella and some internal functions of the body argue against Darwin's "descent with modification". Building up certain proteins to perform the tasks they do today cannot be sustained, they contend. Kitcher responds by noting that while the "anti-selectionists" can make this arguement due to lack of hard fossil evidence for how these functions evolved, neither do the Darwin-detractors offer any evidence for divine tampering to establish them.
The author's classifications may be novel, but the issues involved have been presented often. What makes this book important and necessary is Kitcher's resistance to sinking into wearying invective. His prose is bright and conversational, his lining out of evidence firmly dispassionate and his conclusions irrefutable. He makes no unwarrented claims, and fully recognises that gaps in our knowledge remain to be filled.
Another gap, however, must also be contended with. What to do about those who feel that "faith" is a human necessity? The author offers an historical synopsis of what the Enlightenment contributed to our view of the supernatural. Of all the challenges to Christian belief, it was Darwin's that was the most devastating. It was one thing to displace the Earth from the centre of the universe. It was quite another to remove any supernatural element from life's workings. In particular, it's devastating to some to learn that humans are not the subject focus of divine attention. Kitcher's answer is that a new form of "faith" must emerge, and be encouraged. That "faith" will not resist natural selection, but embrace it. That new religion will combine a form of Darwinist humanism with a sense of the spiritual as a social mucilage. There will be no "god", but there will be a drive to reduce pain and suffering so far as possible. It won't be easy to establish such a concept, particularly in a nation with such vocal forces objecting to natural selection having a role in human affairs. But success depends on the withdrawal of artificial objections to Darwin's ideas. [stephen a. haines - Ottawa, Canada]