Only a Theory: Evolution and the Battle for America's Soul [Hardcover]

Kenneth R. Miller (Author)

Book Description

Publication Date: June 12, 2008

A highly regarded scientist’s examination of the battle between evolution and intelligent design, and its implications for how science is practiced in America.

Editorial Reviews

From Publishers Weekly

Thoroughly enjoyable and informative, this new book by Miller (Finding Darwin's God), a Brown University biologist and leading proponent of evolution, dismantles the scientific basis of intelligent design piece by piece. He does this by taking seriously the claims of intelligent design (though with tongue often in cheek), such as irreducible complexity, and looking at the biological facts and the dubious conclusions ID concepts would lead to. He turns to the peer-reviewed scientific literature to demonstrate that the two biological phenomena ID proponents say could not have evolved—blood-clotting proteins and bacterial flagella—are now well-enough understood to fully rebut intelligent design. Looking at the underlying philosophical issues, Miller explains that ID's proponents want to replace modern science with  'theistic science'... that would use the Divine not as ultimate cause, but as scientific explanation. Miller effectively explores the devastating consequences such a change would have on both science and society. In a measured, well-reasoned book, Miller explains why evolution does not deny us our humanity or our unique place in the universe. Illus. Colbert Report appearance on June 16. (June 16)
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Review

"In this powerfully argued and timely book, Ken Miller takes on the fundamental core of the Intelligent Design movement, and shows with compelling examples and devastating logic that ID is not only bad science but is potentially threatening in other deeper ways to America's future. But make no mistake, this is not some atheistic screed -- Prof. Miller's perspective as a devout believer will allow his case to resonate with believers and non-believers alike."
--Francis Collins, Director, the Human Genome Project and author of The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief

"Only A Theory is an original and perceptive examination of the causes and effects of the ongoing civil war over evolution in America. A wise and tested veteran of its front lines, Ken Miller makes the compelling case that there is much more at stake in this conflict than one scientific theory - the fate of America's hard-earned scientific prowess is in the balance. Readers are sure to be inspired by this passionate appeal to defend and nourish one of our most important institutions."
--Sean B. Carroll, author of The Making of the Fittest and Endless Forms Most Beautiful

“Ever since the publication of Darwin’s Origin of Species 150 years ago, the public controversy over creation and evolution has been fought largely in books. For the past two decades, Ken Miller has been a prominent participant in that debate with his books and lectures. In Only a Theory, Miller takes up the cudgels again in a lively new book that persuasively argues for the theory of evolution, penetratingly critiques the claims for intelligent design, and explains why this dispute should matter to everyone. It may be only a book, but it’s a good one. I highly recommend it.”
--Edward J. Larson, Pulitzer Prize–winning author of Evolution: The Remarkable History of a Scientific Theory

“Ken Miller’s new book, Only a Theory, is everything we have come to expect from him— informed, witty, and above all deeply serious about matters of concern to us all. He takes so-called intelligent design theory apart, piece by piece, showing it for the sham that it is. In its stead, Miller makes a very strong argument for the truth and beauty of evolutionary thinking and begs that we not keep this wonderful science from our children. Highly recommended!”
--Michael Ruse, author of Darwinism and Its Discontents --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Reading level: Ages 18 and up
  
• Hardcover: 256 pages
• Publisher: Viking Adult (June 12, 2008)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 067001883X
• ISBN-13: 978-0670018833
• Product Dimensions: 9.3 x 6.6 x 1 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1 pounds (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 4.2 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (71 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #119,593 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

356 of 409 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars A Magisterial Refutation of Intelligent Design and the Danger It Poses to America's Future, June 12, 2008

By 

John Kwok (New York, NY USA) - See all my reviews
(VINE VOICE)    (HALL OF FAME REVIEWER)    (REAL NAME)   

This review is from: Only a Theory: Evolution and the Battle for America's Soul (Hardcover)

"Only A Theory: Evolution and the Battle for America's Soul" is all we have come to expect from noted Brown University cell biologist Kenneth R. Miller in the course of his many public debates against creationists; a sterling blend of ample wit and elegant prose coupled with his passionate sincerity in defending genuine science's methodology and data from those intellectual Vandals seeking to replace it with their delusional notion of pseudoscientific mendacious intellectual pornography known as Intelligent Design. Here, in this succinctly-worded, quite magnificent, book, Miller has rendered an elegantly stated, magisterial refutation not only of Intelligent Design's pathetic pretense of being genuine science, but of its ongoing - and regrettably still successful - effort to claim America's "scientific soul" as he has defined it, and thus, to pose a dire threat to American scientific and technological supremacy. Fanatical skeptics like Discovery Institute mendacious intellectual pornographers ("Fellows" and "Senior Fellows") Michael Behe, William Dembski, David Klinghoffer, Paul Nelson, and Jonathan Wells, among others, will scoff at Ken Miller's assertions, and accuse him of being "possessed" or "enslaved" by his "atheistic, liberal Darwinist" agenda. However, unlike them, Miller has consistently staked out views recognizing that science and religion must remain separated - despite his own devoutly held Roman Catholic religious convictions - and indeed, his cogent remarks are rather quite persuasive, and, happily, harbor the glimmerings of some hope despite their dire alarmist nature. Without question "Only A Theory" ought to serve as a clarion call to those willing to be persuaded by Miller's arguments, because the emotional, intellectual and political stakes for America's future are quite high, and among these include the survival of a vibrant, American science as a rational enterprise totally devoid of supernatural considerations (For these reasons alone, "Only A Theory" demands a wide readership, extending well beyond the battle lines of contested school districts like Dover, Pennsylvania's to the very halls of Congress, even if there are many, in Washington, D. C., unlikely to listen to Miller's warning.). Not only evolutionary biology, but geology, chemistry, and physics too would be twisted beyond recognition by the Discovery Institute's zealous band of mendacious intellectual pornographers seeking a more expansive "definition" of science that allows "research" into supernatural phenomena; a nonsensical definition endorsed by Behe, having admitted under oath at the 2005 Kitzmiller vs. Dover trial, that astrology could be accepted as science.

What is America's "scientific soul" and why its survival remains in jeopardy from Intelligent Design's ongoing, vigorous - or perhaps more accurately, fanatical - assault, are among the most important, most compelling, themes examined by Miller in his elegant, terse tome. As Miller eloquently notes in the opening chapter, his recognition of a "battle for America's scientific soul" is one he has discerned only recently, in the aftermath of recent legal battles against Intelligent Design and other creationist foes. And, regrettably, it is a battle that goes well beyond shaping the future course of American secondary school science education. Miller passionately believes that our "scientific soul" is exactly the very essence that makes us Americans; a healthy disdain for authority, but one which does respect pragmatism, and demands results, in short, the very cultural environment that has been embraced, and sustained by mainstream science for centuries. A cultural environment whose revolutionary nature arose in little more than a decade during the American Revolution, according to Miller's distinguished Brown University colleague, eminent American historian Gordon Wood, when Americans transformed their society from "one little different from the hierarchal societies of European monarchies to one that took up the truly radical notion that individuals were both the source of a government's legitimacy and its greatest hope for progress."

In many respects, not only is Intelligent Design an idea that is "un-American", since its very principles are antithetical to America's defining cultural values of practicality, pragmatism and disrespect of authority, but, in its key objective of "overthrowing methodological naturalism", Intelligent Design, argues Miller, is a far more serious and dangerous threat to mainstream science than traditional creationism, since it is a revolutionary assault against the very fabric of scientific methodology ("methodological naturalism", or rather, what is commonly recognized as the scientific method comprised of hypothesis generation and testing) employed by science for centuries, transforming science into an unrecognizable entity that is as rife with relativism as the leftist-leaning social sciences criticized by philosopher Allan Bloom in his landmark tome, "The Closing of the American Mind: How Higher Education Has Impoverished America's Young and Failed Its Students". Indeed Miller observes astutely that Bloom's analysis was not a conservative-leaning attack on leftist Academia, but instead, one warning how a relativistic "openness" - an uncritical embrace of all ideas - was detrimental to the survival of rational thought on college and university campuses, and, not surprisingly, Bloom contended that the sciences were the only realm of Academia unaffected by the politics of openness. However, if Intelligent Design successfully gains further acceptance amongst a sympathetic American populace, then, Miller warns, American science would be susceptible too to the same political plagues affecting the arts, humanities and social sciences (Ironically the same plagues that have been the subjects of ample discourse, mostly hysterical ridicule, from leading Intelligent Design advocates like Philip Johnson, David Klinghoffer, and Ann Coulter.). This is a warning which should be heeded by anyone who reads or hears of Miller's message, since the very essence, the very future, of American science is at stake.

If Intelligent Design is "un-American" in both its tone and temperment, then why is it gaining wider acceptance among Americans? Miller concludes one of his early chapters noting how biologists have failed to persuade the public of "the imperfections of biological design", implying that such imperfections are not, in of themselves, "proof" of evolution; an observation which Intelligent Design advocates have been quite persuasive. Moreover, by emphasizing the existence of biological design to the general public so they can ask "How come?" and noting the other "weaknesses" of evolutionary theory, Intelligent Design advocates are winning the public relations battle and, so far, the battle for America's scientific soul.

"Only A Theory" should not be viewed only as a concise, well-reasoned polemic on behalf of rational thought, and America's scientific future. It is as I have noted earlier, an elegant refutation of the mendacious intellectual pornography that is Intelligent Design. However, instead of simply refuting it, Miller examines it, asking us to look into the possibility that Intelligent Design is credible science, and therefore, a viable, truly better, alternative to contemporary evolutionary theory in explaining the structure and history of Planet Earth's biodiversity (In fairness to Miller, however, the very brevity of this book means that "Only A Theory" does not include ample discussion of issues ranging from understanding the tempo and mode of evolution, the relationship of sociobiology to contemporary theory, and the importance, if any, of neutral models of evolution; all of which have been cited by Intelligent Design advocates and creationists as solid "evidence" that evolutionary theory is an outmoded theory in "crisis", on an intellectual "death watch", awaiting its replacement by Intelligent Design. Of course, despite such delusional assertions, evolutionary theory remains a vigorous, unifying scientific theory of biology; a point Miller emphasizes in the book's conclusion.). Miller devotes much of Chapters Two and Three in reviewing the history of Intelligent Design, beginning with William Paley's work, and in explaining Behe's concept of Irreducible Complexity and Dembski's "mathematical" notion of Complex Specified Information. In evoking once more Behe's favorite mechanical mousetrap analogue as an "example" of Irreducibly Complex, Miller offers his most concise, but extensive, explanation why the mousetrap isn't, offering instead, some sly, and humorous, analogues of exaptation at work (While Miller doesn't refer specifically to the term exaptation as such - one that has gained widespread currency since the publication of a classic early 1980s paper co-authored by paleontologists Stephen Jay Gould and Elisabeth Vrba - anyone familiar with it should recognize the mousetrap as a mechanical analogue comparable to the evolution of feathers in theropod dinosaurs originally for thermoregulation, before assuming prominent roles in powered flight in avian dinosaurs and their closely related kin.). He follows up his elegant discussion of the mousetrap with one of a real biological exaptation, the evolution of a "poison pump" in some bacteria from the bacterial flagellum (Behe's real-life favorite example -which he asserts still - of Irreducible Complexity.).

If we were "Embracing Design" (Chapter Three), then how would Intelligent Design explain the history of Earth's biodiversity? Using as an elegant example, the evolutionary history of horses, Miller shows why Intelligent Design does a poor job of it, observing that an Intelligent Designer's only consistent pattern would be the constant replacement of "designed" species due to their extinctions (Unless, of course as... Read more ›

50 of 57 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars A tale of warning from a great fighter in the "evolution wars", June 15, 2008

By 

Puck Mendelssohn (Seattle WA) - See all my reviews

This review is from: Only a Theory: Evolution and the Battle for America's Soul (Hardcover)

The market is crowded with books on the evolution/intelligent design "controversy," so much so that works in this area have become highly repetitious--read one, it seems, and one has read them all. This is a refreshing book in a couple of respects.

First, Miller's rhetorical approach is to err on the side of taking the claims of intelligent design more seriously than they really deserve. As a result, the book does not come across as polemical, and this gives rise to the hope that an ID creation-sympathetic reader might actually read it and learn something truly useful about the flaws of ID creationism rather than getting insulted and putting it aside in disgust. Miller initially presents the claims of design without rebuttal and acknowledges how powerful these claims--if true--are. Only after having given these claims an initially friendly treatment does he then return to them and explain just why they are unsupported by evidence.

Second, Miller argues fairly forcefully that acknowledging the facts of evolution does not compel one to reject religion, and he does so from the position of a person of faith--Miller being, himself, a Roman Catholic. He does not purport to be able to "prove" his religious faith in purely rational terms, but only to show that science does not exclude it. His arguments, being somewhat subjective in nature (e.g., the "fine-tuned universe" argument) are going to seem persuasive to some and not at all persuasive to others, but he does a splendid job of setting them out and putting the case well.

The main thesis comes toward the end, and is reflected in the subtitle, "Evolution and the Battle for America's Soul." Miller is concerned that the fight over creationism has morphed, through the political program of intelligent design, into an all-out attack upon science at its roots--and upon America's "scientific soul." Where the hard sciences have been largely untouched by the advent of extreme relativism, ID threatens to introduce that relativism to biology--a relativism which asserts that there is no real "right" or "wrong," that objective knowledge is beyond our reach, and that all points of view and ways of looking at evidence are equally valid. Such a view would of course undermine the whole foundation of science. Materialism is under attack; methodological naturalism is under attack; and if these attacks succeed, what can remain of science? Nothing good, to be sure; baraminology would have equal status with cladistics, "flood geology" equal status with real geology, and so on.

Miller's involvement in school-book publishing as the author of popular biology textbooks, his involvement in disputes over school-book choice, and his testimony as a fact and expert witness in federal trials over anti-evolution laws and ID creationism policies have given him a seat front-and-center to this battle for our scientific soul, and his hopes and fears clearly have been shaped by the fights he has seen. He ably points out the strangeness of the dispute, including the odd manner in which the relativism of the far academic left has been enlisted in the service of an agenda of the religious right--a very peculiar marriage of absolutism and relativism indeed.

If I were going to try to persuade a creationist friend to give due consideration to the theory of evolution by natural selection, this is the book I would give him. The treatment of the science is necessarily a quick one, but it is a good one if the reader has not done a lot of reading in biology lately. Miller's sincerity in his religious belief comes through strongly, and constitutes an excellent "testimony" for someone who thinks that there is a stark and unavoidable choice between Darwin and God.

What impact will this book have? It is hard to say. As positive and persuasive as it is, I think Miller's theology -- which he treats here in less detail than in Finding Darwin's God -- will seem unsatisfying to the hard-core literalists who are the strongest adherents to ID creationism. Miller sounds too much like a Deist, or a Gouldian NOMA-ist, to give much comfort to people who believe in a God who answers prayers and does miracles. Miller has elsewhere disclaimed both Deism and Gould's NOMA concept, but there is a resemblance which those who have "rapture-ready" bumper stickers will easily notice. The best hope, and one to which this work is well suited, is that people whose theology is less literal but who are nonetheless troubled by what they see as a general "godlessness" and "purposelessness" in evolution will find this book persuasive. Miller feels that Americans are characteristically practical, and it is to that pragmatic nature that he appeals; with any luck, he will win some hearts and minds.

52 of 63 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars A former evangelical's review., July 17, 2008

By 

Erik Olson "Seeker Reviews" (Ridgefield, WA United States) - See all my reviews
(TOP 1000 REVIEWER)    (VINE VOICE)    (REAL NAME)   

This review is from: Only a Theory: Evolution and the Battle for America's Soul (Hardcover)

Last year I left evangelicalism in favor of agnosticism. A major reason for my departure was twenty-four years of negative experiences within the Church. However, another important impetus was an exposure to deeper levels of science and rationality through the works of Hitchens, Dawkins, Stenger, and others. I had become tired of living with the tension between various conflicting ideas that Christianity requires of a believer, and these authors suggested a more rational alternative. One area of tension in particular was the dissonance between evolution and intelligent design (ID). "Only A Theory" addresses this battle, and it's one of the best and most tactful books I've read on the subject. Indeed, it should act as the obsolescence notice that ID has needed for a long time.

"Only A Theory" focuses on the American battlefront concerning evolution and ID. The two foes recently went head-to-head in Pennsylvania, where both camps were put on trial as a result of the Dover Board of Education's desire to add ID instruction in public school. After hearing testimony from both sides (including the author and ID proponent Michael Behe) and examining the evidence, the court ruled that ID was another name for religious creationism, and it was thrown out of the academic setting. Mr. Miller was encouraged by science's courtroom triumph, but given the strength and righteous indignation of the ID movement, he fears for the future of evolution and the scientific method. The title of this book reflects that concern, since one of ID's biggest catchphrases is that evolution is "only a theory," and therefore other competing "theories" like ID deserve equal hearing.

The author has reason to be afraid. As a former evangelical Christian and seminary graduate, I can affirm that ID is a user-friendly term for a faith-based system of thought that stands at odds with rational science. I've seen "Darwinism" portrayed by the Church as a subtle tool of satanic forces arrayed against God's faithful. Rationalism is considered a slippery slope to atheism and moral relativism, as exemplified by Nietzsche, Nazism, and Communism. To counter this darkness, believers such as Henry Morris responded with scientific creationism. However, that term sounded too religious, so the name was changed to the more palatable "intelligent design." ID star Michael Behe wrote books advocating ID-centric ideas like "irreducible complexity" (IC) to show that gradual evolution could not have produced complex biological organs or processes. Do the proponents of ID have a point, or are they simply in over their heads?

The author argues the latter. He categorically rejects the idea that ID has any scientific merit, and correctly labels it as a philosophical branch of evangelical Christianity. However, far from the polemic statements made by Dawkins and Hitchens, Mr. Miller presents the facts underlying modern science and evolution in a non-inflammatory way. Although he acknowledges that individuals can be biased, he casts science as a non-ideological truth-seeking discipline because of its reliance on natural laws, provable facts, and repeatable results that are independent of political leaning. With that in mind, he's not afraid of demolishing irreducible complexity by citing recent scientific discoveries about its favorite examples, such as the eye, blood clotting, and bacterial flagellum.

But the author is most concerned with ID's dual fatal flaws, two gaping logical holes that would damage American leadership in science and rational progress if ID supplanted evolution as a basis of life's origin. First he shows that ID is really just a fancy term for creationism by quoting ID documents and statements made by its proponents. Bottom line, ID ultimately relies on untestable and unrepeatable supernatural influence vs. testable and repeatable processes based on natural laws. Second, Mr. Miller is convinced that ID encourages laziness of thought, as demonstrated by irreducible complexity. IC makes it easy to view an evolutionary difficulty not as a knowledge barrier to overcome, but as a demonstration of God's creative ability that might as well be left unchallenged. That's a dangerous attitude because it discourages rigorous scientific investigation, ironically by introducing a relativist religious bent based on one faith's concept of God.

This approach was exemplified by my last Christian mentor, who sternly told me that I should simply have faith and accept the writings of Josh McDowell and C. S. Lewis - or face God's corrective "2x4 and lightning bolts." Needless to say, I was not impressed with his line of "reasoning." This "don't ask questions" attitude permeates ID (not to mention church dogma), and flies in the face of rational thought and proven scientific methods. If science merely accepted past findings and failed to innovate, we'd still be riding horse and buggy and living without electricity (much as the Amish faithful do today). I couldn't live with checking my brain at the church door, so I parted ways with my teacher and my faith.

My above experience enables me to identify with the author's fears for the future of science and rationalism, especially due to the rise of conservative evangelicalism in America. As a former evangelical, I know how tenaciously Christians cleave to their belief system. Even thoughtful and well-meaning believers tend to ask safe questions and avoid confronting the holes in ID and church dogma because they fear God's wrath or loss of Christian fellowship. But as in the movie "300," I hope that the advocates of rationality will triumph over the forces of mysticism. Well-written and thoughtful books like "Only a Theory" will certainly help, and it has my highest recommendation. Other good books that deal with science and faith are "Why Darwin Matters: The Case Against Intelligent Design," by Michael Shermer; "God: The Failed Hypothesis," by Victor J. Stenger; and "The Reluctant Mr. Darwin" by David Quammen.