The Design Revolution: Answering the Toughest Questions About Intelligent Design [Paperback]

William A. Dembski (Author), Charles W. Colson (Author)

Book Description

Publication Date: January 15, 2007

Winner of a 2005 Book Award!

A 2005 Gold Medallion finalist.

Is it science? Is it religion? What exactly is the Design Revolution?

Today scientists, mathematicians and philosophers in the intelligent design movement are challenging a certain view of science--one that limits its investigations and procedures to purely law-like and mechanical explanations. They charge that there is no scientific reason to exclude the consideration of intelligence, agency and purpose from truly scientific research. In fact, they say, the practice of science often does already include these factors!

As the intelligent design movement has gained momentum, questions have naturally arisen to challenge its provocative claims. In this book William A. Dembski rises to the occasion clearly and concisely answering the most vexing questions posed to the intelligent design program. Writing with nonexperts in mind, Dembski responds to more than sixty questions asked by experts and nonexperts alike who have attended his many public lectures, as well as objections raised in written reviews.

The Design Revolution has begun. Its success depends on how well it answers the questions of its detractors. Read this book and you'll have a good idea of the prospects and challenges facing this revolution in scientific thinking.

Editorial Reviews

From Publishers Weekly

Dembski, a philosopher/mathematician who has been an important theorist for the intelligent design movement, handles a wide range of questions and objections that should give both fans and detractors of ID plenty to chew on. The book's timing is appropriate; it is only in the past few years that ID, initially dismissed by some scientists as "creationism in a cheap tuxedo," has also begun to attract a more sophisticated brand of criticism. These critiques come not only from evolutionary biologists and philosophers of biology, but also from Christian theologians who have made peace with Darwinian evolution. While most of the core arguments of this book will be familiar to readers of the ID literature, they are presented here in (if one may say so) more highly evolved form: explanations are clearer, objections are borne more patiently, distinctions and concessions are artfully made. Without denying the theological and cultural implications of ID, Dembski is more concerned with ID's future as a scientific enterprise: a point where despite some successes the movement continues to struggle. The book's format-responding to individual questions in 44 short chapters-makes for a clear, if repetitive, read. Chapters can focus on a single issue and adopt an appropriate tone: basic questions get basic replies, pointed objections get forceful rejoinders, and technical questions allow Dembski to unleash a faculty for technical detail that can only be called impressive. The latter may leave some general-interest readers in the dark, but readers with the requisite background will appreciate the subtlety, insight, and occasional quirkiness of Dembski's theoretical work.
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.

Review

"Dembski's Intelligent Design is a centerpiece in the current renewal of intellectual responsibility among thoughtful Christians. Everyone with interest in and responsibility for how science and theology interrelate should study it carefully. This is especially true for leaders in education." -- --Dallas Willard, professor of philosophy, University of Southern California --This text refers to the MP3 CD edition.

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Paperback: 324 pages
• Publisher: IVP Books (January 15, 2007)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0830832165
• ISBN-13: 978-0830832163
• Product Dimensions: 9 x 6 x 0.9 inches
• Shipping Weight: 15.2 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 3.3 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (71 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #244,591 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

A mathematician and philosopher, William A. Dembski is Research Professor in Philosophy at Southwestern Seminary in Ft. Worth, where he directs its Center for Cultural Engagement. He is also a senior fellow with Discovery Institute's Center for Science and Culture in Seattle. Previously he was the Carl F. H. Henry Professor of Theology and Science at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, where he founded its Center for Theology and Science. Before that he was Associate Research Professor in the Conceptual Foundations of Science at Baylor University, where he headed the first intelligent design think-tank at a major research university: The Michael Polanyi Center.

Dr. Dembski has taught at Northwestern University, the University of Notre Dame, and the University of Dallas. He has done postdoctoral work in mathematics at MIT, in physics at the University of Chicago, and in computer science at Princeton University. A graduate of the University of Illinois at Chicago where he earned a B.A. in psychology, an M.S. in statistics, and a Ph.D. in philosophy, he also received a doctorate in mathematics from the University of Chicago in 1988 and a master of divinity degree from Princeton Theological Seminary in 1996. He has held National Science Foundation graduate and postdoctoral fellowships.

Dr. Dembski has published articles in mathematics, engineering, philosophy, and theology journals and is the author/editor of more than a dozen books. In The Design Inference: Eliminating Chance Through Small Probabilities (Cambridge University Press, 1998), he examines the design argument in a post-Darwinian context and analyzes the connections linking chance, probability, and intelligent causation. The sequel to The Design Inference appeared with Rowman & Littlefield in 2002 and critiques Darwinian and other naturalistic accounts of evolution. It is titled No Free Lunch: Why Specified Complexity Cannot Be Purchased without Intelligence. Dr. Dembski has edited several influential anthologies, including Uncommon Dissent: Intellectuals Who Find Darwinism Unconvincing (ISI, 2004) and Debating Design: From Darwin to DNA (Cambridge University Press, 2004, co-edited with Michael Ruse). His newest book, The End of Christianity, differs markedly from his others, attempting to understand how the Fall of humanity can be real in light of modern science.

As interest in intelligent design has grown in the wider culture, Dr. Dembski has assumed the role of public intellectual. In addition to lecturing around the world at colleges and universities, he is frequently interviewed on the radio and television. His work has been cited in numerous newspaper and magazine articles, including three front page stories in the New York Times as well as the August 15, 2005 Time magazine cover story on intelligent design. He has appeared on the BBC, NPR (Diane Rehm, etc.), PBS (Inside the Law with Jack Ford; Uncommon Knowledge with Peter Robinson), CSPAN2, CNN, Fox News, ABC Nightline, and the Daily Show with Jon Stewart.

[Photo by Laszlo Bencze]

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

143 of 186 people found the following review helpful

5.0 out of 5 stars When actually read, this book answers questions. December 18, 2004

By Zach Stearns

Format:Hardcover

I am simply disheartened by the dearth of actual consideration displayed by many reviewers of this book. One cannot use this book review as a chance to rant about Dembski's past work and call it a book review. The reason of The Design Revolution is to handle the same criticisms that are cited in many of the Amazon reviews of this book. While I will give some of my opinions on the book, I first find it important to address some issues.

For instance, do not review this book if you have not read it. Just because one does not feel that intelligent design (ID) satisfies his/her a priori dogmatisms does not mean that he/she has the right to reject this book, or even intelligent design for that matter. Doing so would be a prime example of apriorism, a logical fallacy. It is surely ironic that virtually all of those here who pass off this book as drivel, without even considering the content of it, do so while practically proclaiming Charles Darwin -- who said that "A fair result can be obtained only by fully stating and balancing the facts and arguments on both sides of each question" -- is correct. Ah, but the critic may reply with some silly "objections."

The easiest way for the fundamentalist Darwinist to evade this attack is to say that there are no facts or arguments behind intelligent design. They use the fact that Dembski is a Christian to constitute their decision to impulsively reject the book as creationist propaganda. This action is not only illogical, it is also intrinsically unscientific, since the act refuses to weigh the evidence supporting their claim that it is creationist propaganda. Once again, this is quite ironic.

In fact, if the critic claiming that ID is biblical/scientific creationism in a tux, a theological enterprise, part of a political agenda, etc., would actually read the book (or even Part 1 of the book), then he/she might find answers quite easily. Of course, honest objections to the book are welcomed by Dembski, since he takes time to respond to many of the objections. However, saying that this book is written for the choir, calling Dembski a religious fundamentalist, declaring the book "thinly disguised Christian blather," and asserting that the book is invalid by saying that Charles Colson, the Watergate felon and the author of the Foreword, is not a scientist are not honest objections. They are logical fallacies (apriorism, argumentum ad lapidem, argumentum ad hominem, and the red herring, to name a few). They display no sign of willingness to search for an answer. Those ignorant objections simply show prior, dogmatic commitments to other ideas, and no amount of books could shake that critic's faith; this person has closed his/her mind.

With all of that said, I will focus on the book. I believe that The Design Revolution definitely achieved Dembski's goal to compile all of the common objections to ID and answer them as completely, yet as briefly, as possible. These answers needed to be somewhat brief in order for Dembski to address as many as possible. I've found that the more complicated questions did require more space, and that was important.

I honestly cannot think of any question about intelligent design that Dembski "evaded," as declared by an earlier reviewer. Perhaps Dembski didn't address every critic of his own work, but he was never under any obligation to answer every critic. Some of the critics here have used the subtitle of the book against Dembski by saying that it should have been "Evading the Toughest Questions About Intelligent Design."

However, one particular person favoring such a title change followed his point by saying that Dembski hasn't published a response to many ID critics. Notice that the subtitle does not say, "Answering All of the Critics of William Dembski." Dembski wrote this book so he could publish objections to the theory, not so he could argue with his critics. If you are actually searching for Dembski's replies to specific objections made my specific people, go to his website (www.designinference.com/) to find some of them.

If you are a strict Bible fundamentalist, then this book might not be for you. While someone may say that this book is disguised biblical fundamentalism, Dembski does not even talk about his biblical beliefs. All I know is that he is a Christian. Therefore, for all I know, he could reject much of the Bible. It's not my place, nor is it this book's place, to elaborate on such a thing. However, I do know that Dembski rejects six-day creationism, so strict fundamentalists might reject this book, along with ID, as heresy. However, this act is not supported by logic, and it is very narrow-minded. Fundamentalists should only read this if they are willing to consider ID.

Furthermore, the statement above also applies to fundamentalist Darwinists. Such people cannot be expected to get anything from this book, since they will probably read it while doodling along the margins, merely looking at the pretty words, and cheerfully turning the pages just to say that they read the book. They can then triumphantly drop the book and say that they are still atheist Darwinists after reading the book. This, also, defies reason and is purely unscientific, by any definition.

Therefore, this book is for the honest questioner. If you wonder whether ID is disguised theology, if you think that the religious motivation of ID proponents might render ID unsubstantiated, if you think that the impossibility of optimal design is a true threat to ID, if you have questions about Dembski's acclaimed Explanatory Filter, if you find it strange that science heartily welcomes the search for extraterrestrial intelligence yet vehemently rejects the search for a designer of biological systems, if you ponder the problem of the origin of information (DNA), if you wonder how ID is compatible with naturalism, if you think that the design inference is an argument from ignorance (and are willing to listen to answers), if you think that David Hume concluded all logical talk of a possible designer, or if you just wonder what in the world all of this talk about intelligent design is for, then this is your book. If your mind is open, and if you will read, study, and reflect on the thoughts presented by Dembski -- without any silly, a priori commitments -- then read this book. You will enjoy it.

6 of 6 people found the following review helpful

4.0 out of 5 stars Carl Gustafson. January 5, 2011

By Carl Gustafson

Format:Paperback|Amazon Verified Purchase

People read books on intelligent design and evolution from one of two motives that I can see: to reinforce their worldview, or to understand their opponent for the purpose of dismantling his position. There may be a few reading from curiosity but they are obviously in the minority as anyone can see from the reviews of books on design and evolution. The readers either give five stars or one star to these kinds of books, which is absurd. The stars are being awarded on the basis of subject, not merit as literature or craftsmanship. I read this book because as I look around the world it seems like it is designed. I wanted to read scientifically sound logic to support my observations. This book does do that and does it well. But I don't give it five stars because it lacks passion and style. While I don't want an arrogant, puffed up, counter puncher to the condescending style of Richard Dawkins, I would like to see some flair and maybe a competitive edge. But that's just me.

Dembski manages to explain things in relatively understandable scientific language so a non scientist has a chance of comprehension, and his arguments are cogent and tight, without the feel of a preacher hiding in there somewhere. I found it to be fair, mature, intelligent, and unemotional. While I'd like see at least a hint of panache, maybe some humor, or a cuss word or two, I imagine one has to write on these subjects like an academician to have credibility among scientists. At least I did get through this one, unlike some of the stodgy, stilted, esoteric, self-indulgence some of these guys hand out that has to be read with a hammer and chisel applied to the impenetrable vocabulary. But I never really got a sense of to whom Dembski was writing. It seems to be "just written" and then tossed out to whoever. Maybe that is as it should be, but his voice didn't seem like it was talking to me. If all you want is to hear good solid arguments for intelligent design, and have the definition of intelligent design clarified, then this is the book for you. While not as fun as Dawkins, Dembski is clear and convincing.

110 of 150 people found the following review helpful

5.0 out of 5 stars Someone/thing has chosen wisely: Uncanny Selection September 3, 2004

By Doc Walker

Format:Hardcover

As a professional in the scientific research field, I find this book challenging intellectually and stimulating to myself and my colleagues. The main question for those rejecting ID and embracing its alternative DD (Dumb Determinism, or Deterministic Developmentalism) is: which postulation administers the most satisfactory answer to why of necessity there has been an unbroken, uninterrupted sequential, cumulative increase (Quality and Quality) in useful information in our universe? We deride the notion of Spontaneous Generation (in no-time or like time-lapse photography or fast-forwarding an accelerated video), but have no problem with the identical concept in magnified astronomical time-delay or decelerated super-slo-mo trillions of frames over billions of years? Instantaneous or Spontaneous or Extemporaneous or 'spur of the moment',nope. Extenuaneous, Superannuated, 'spur of the megatemporal', yep.

Both ID and DD deal with information creation, identification, evaluation and decisioned opting in or out as functional or non-functional. Both deal with sorting. Both deal with selectivity of data. The other question for DD (that ID answers) is: how does the universe get from a-Necessity to Necessity? How does it get from No-Chance to Chance? Needlessness to Need? Neither Random nor non-Random to either or both??

ID deals with Big Beginning; DD deals with Big Banging. Question for DD: at Absolute Zero pre matter/energy/space-time, what triggered a non-existent 'Bigness' to 'Bangness' status? Before anything was, theoretically there was no chance, no need, no will, no intent, no necessity, no random, no concept of anything, no choices, no options for natural selection to operate from, no nature, no selectionability. All of a sudden DD has us take on faith that all this and more came to be 'just because'?

DD is all about Progressive Process from nothing to everything, Advantageous Adaptation from simple to complex; extemporaneous evolving from Lesser to Greater; from 'no end in mind' to 'mind in the end'. Is this what we observe in 1st Law of Thermodynamics (nothing of itself can be created or destroyed) and 2nd Law (nothing of itself upgrades its complexity or functionality, but greater degradation the longer the time-devolution- is the fixed rule) as well as the law of diminishing returns (xerox of a xerox of a xerox ad seq.)?

If there could be no 'Artificial Intelligence' without superior Human ID, how could there be Human Intelligence without a higher Superiority Order of Intelligization? Can the universe really get the Greater from the Lesser? If AI can't create itself through DD (Natural Selection), how can we hold the creed that DD created itself and its own I.Q. equal or superior who in turn creates AI?

Ultimately it all comes down to faith in presented data as personal Control Beliefs dictate should be admitted into one's court: experimentation, observation, experience, intuition, historical inquiry, firsthand eyewitness Exhibit A,B,C,etc. Both ID and DD present their cases. After a preponderance of the evidence, which is the most compelling?

This book settles with: ID - Beyond a Reasonable Doubt. The other side makes their Intellectual Selection: DD - Doubt a Reasonable Beyond.