Intelligent Design Creationism and Its Critics: Philosophical, Theological, and Scientific Perspectives

By Robert T. Pennock

Book Overview

The last decade saw the arrival of a new player in the creation/evolution debate--the intelligent design creationism (IDC) movement, whose strategy is to act as "the wedge" to overturn Darwinism and scientific naturalism. This anthology of writings by prominent creationists and their critics focuses on what is novel about the new movement. It serves as a companion to Robert Pennock's Tower of Babel, in which he criticizes the wedge movement, as well as other new varieties of creationism. The book contains articles previously published in specialized, hard-to-find journals, as well as new contributions. Each section contains introductory background information, articles by influential creationists and their critics, and in some cases responses by the creationists. The discussions cover IDC as a political movement, IDC's philosophical attack on evolution, the theological debate over the apparent conflict between evolution and the Bible, IDC's scientific claims, and philosopher Alvin Plantinga's critique of naturalism and evolution. The book concludes with Pennock's "Why Creationism Should Not Be Taught in the Public Schools."

• Format: Paperback
• Language: English
• ISBN: 0262661241
• ISBN13: 9780262661249
• Release Date: December 2001
• Publisher: MIT Press (MA)
• Length: 825 Pages
• Weight: 2.44 lbs.
• Dimensions: 1.6" x 6.1" x 9.0"
• Age Range: 18 years and up
• Grade Range: Postsecondary and higher

Customer Reviews

Intelligent Design Creationism and Its Critics: Philosophical, Theological, and Scientific Perspecti

As someone who reads these reviews, I will do what I look for and keep it short. I have read Pennock's book (I wonder if some of the other reviewers actually have). I have found it to be an enjoyable read and full of useful information. It gives a very thoughtful over view of the current Creationist argument. It explains the background of the proponents of intelligent design and their methods of arguing. It then systematically shows where the flaws in their reasons lie. Pennock doesn't berate the creationists but does show that their reasoning, although perhaps seemingly persuasive in the courtroom of public opinion, really is not supported scientifically.

Intelligent Design Creationism Versus Darwinian Orthodoxy.

This rather large book consists of a series of essays detailing the perspective of Intelligent Design Theory from the Christian point of view and a series of contrasting essays from Darwinian orthodoxy opposing this theory. One unfortunate aspect of this book, which consists otherwise of some rather interesting essays, is that the essays are selected in such a manner so as to make the ID perspective look ridiculous at every point. Thus, after every issue is dealt with from the perspective of ID two subsequent essays appear which are supposed to refute the ID perspective from the Darwinian. In practice, this amounts to little more than overkill which makes one wonder, what is the point of having a debate if you are going to stack the cards beforehand. Also, many of these so- called "objective" scientists and philosophers seem to be engaging in little more than name calling and credential comparing. One example of this is the essay of the popularizer Richard Dawkins who appears to be interested very little in the actual content of an essay by Philip Johnson and more interested in the fact that this individual happens to be a lawyer, cashing in on the near universal animosity felt towards lawyers among the populist masses. This isn't to say that Johnson's essay is particularly good or rings true, but the fact that Dawkins cannot control his juvenile tendencies here is really a good indication of the knee jerk reactionism of the Darwinian Left. Of course, the issue of Intelligent Design is a complicated one, one that is not fully worked out here. In addition, the compiler Pennock seems to be under the impression that "creationism" is strictly a Protestant phenomenon. This may be the case for "liberal Catholicism" however many traditionalists within the Catholic church have offered an alternative interpretation of Creation. In fact, the writings of Jesuit priest and evolutionist Teilhard de Chardin were placed on the Index and can hardly be taken to constitute orthodoxy within the church. Also the "process theologies" proposed by certain clergymen within this volume can hardly be taken for Christian orthodoxy either. The issues involving Darwinism include a conspicuous absence of intermediate evolutionary forms within the fossil record, a problem concerning the probabilities involved (being miniscule, making it difficult to reconcile Darwinism with reality, at least in one interpretation), and other issues dealing with absent data regarding (supposed) speciation. Intelligent Design Theory differs from classical Creationism in that it is not "young Earth" and that it does not take the actual Genesis account overliterally, merely arguing for an intelligent designer. Also, it should be noted that Creationism proper need not be solely Christian; for example, there exist Islamic, Hindu, and Buddhist "creationists" who challenge the Darwinist hegemony. Thus, the issues involved are rather complex and really it requires a careful reading to fu

Side-by-Side Comparisons of Evolution and ID/Creationism

This is a truly useful and comprehensive compendium of articles on both sides of the divide between evolution and ID/creationism. It isn't a fair, evenly split group of articles, a point made openly and up front by the Editor, Robert Pennock. Nonetheless, both sides are presented in their own words with no editing or rewriting of essays, allowing you to judge for yourself. The various articles range from detailed philosophical analyses of ID/creationist positions, to (sometimes contentious) give and take between writers on each side. The articles are telling in their description and analyses of the foundations of the ID/creationist positions and readily show how shallow they are. What comes through from most of the opponents of evolution is their truly shallow understanding of the incredible depth of evidence from multiple disciplines that supports the basic idea of evolution. Even the scientists on the ID side seem to have only a single idea from which they develop their criticism but which never addresses the breadth of data available. Unfortunately, neither here nor elsewhere have I found a really accessible discussion of the total evidence from all disciplines that bears on evolution. Perhaps the closest is Carl Zimmer's book based on the PBS series. The highlights of the book include the opening article by Barbara Forrest that clearly outlines the "Wedge" strategy and the totally religious basis of ID/creationism and does so virtually completely in the words those who favor ID/creationist views. It's rather hard for ID/creationist proponents to deny its religious basis when they themselves state it explicitly. Another is the article by Nancey Murphy critiquing Philip Johnson's arguments. Finally, there is an excellent article by Pennock followed by an exchange between Pennock and the theologian and creationist proponent Alvin Plantinga that very effectively dissects and destroys the argument for teaching ID/creationism in science class and does so not primarily from a scientific point of view but from a religious point of view. Many articles are reprints but from (for most of us) rather obscure journals. This compendium is an enormous service in the debate over ID/creationism. Thank you, Robert Pennock.

Designs on culture

This is a useful compendium of articles on the current Darwin debate over Intelligent Design, edited by Robert Pennock, the author of Tower of Babel, containing a lot of material not easily available to the book buying public. Although slightly weightier on the science side, it contains a considerable number of articles from the proponents of ID. The same mistakes over natural selection are repeated here, as in Pennock's previous books. It gets tiresome to hear how the genetic algorithm validates Darwin. Apparently Creationists are the only ones with reliable consultants, like Dempski, who can point out this fact. This debate has accompanied every stage of the development of evolutionary theory, and it is perhaps worth asking why the issue is always deadlocked, a stalemate. It is significant that the dialectic of this question dealt with by Kant never enter the discussion. Both sides have a metaphysical agenda.I should say that as a critic of selectionism, I find evolution to be foundational, and that Dempski clearly indicated one confusion in this field, that between design and necessity, in relation to the chance and necessity described by Monod. We cannot separate or distinguish this naturalistic 'sense of design' associated with unknown necessity from the quite different Argument by Design, of Paley. And the dialectic of Paley and Darwin is a lesser version of a more complex thesis of Kant, a theist, who never allowed himself this proof. One could only with reluctance support ID in the classroom, although it has every right to be there a topic of dissenting discussion. However, both sides are dishonest in what is a struggle for the minds of young students, an unseemly farce that should teach students to teach themselves, outside the educational system, which is hopeless on this issue. The first thing students need to learn is from a good course on social ideology and propaganda, especially if it is forced on them in the name of science. The religionists have their own deceptions. Students deserve to know that selectionism has challengers. But the design argument is one fourth fancy math (which can never really resolve its perplexities) and three fourths cultural agenda, and the entire trojan horse effects of particular religions. Yet it is easy to criticize the Creationist or ID side of the debate, but one must ask if all those who rotely support Darwinian viewpoints have really grasped the implications of what they have agreed to? Thus the world of sociobiology has made dominant the untested, and dubious propositions of the genetic evolution of ethical man. It is not surprising that someone should protest this replacement, an hypothesis at best, for all other ethical views in such dogmatic fashion. Darwinists invite endless trouble for themselves. So we can hardly blame the Bible belt from not kowtowing to the Darwin propaganda machine. However, the solution has to be to claim the classrooms for standard science and yet doing this by withd

Excellent resource

Intelligent Design Creationism (IDC) is the latest manifestation of anti-evolutionism, a social movement which owes it's roots to pre-Darwinian opposition to the idea of transmutation of species. As with Victorian opposition to evolution, IDC is more concerned with the (putative) social implications of the acceptance of evolution than with the fact that the theory is both scientifically and philosophically sound. The acceptance of evolution is seen as a manifestation of the rampant materialism and naturalism of modern Western culture, and IDC advocates ask practising scientists to replace methodological naturalism (the idea that, while the supernatural may exist, one must exclude supernatural explanation within _scientific_ discourse) with a view that allows the Divine to be used as an explanation whenerver science cannot explain a phenomenon.Rob Pennock - a philosopher at Michigan State University - has followed his extremely useful "Tower of Babel" with this collection of IDC pieces and responses from more "mainstream" scientists, philosophers and theologians. Pennock is unbiased, allowing both sides to present their case, and the collection contains many articles that were previously only found in academic journals. As such, the volume will be highly useful to individuals on _both_ sides of this issue. As an educator, I have used Pennock's first book in class and both students and I have profited from his insights and clarity. I only regret that this volume was not in print when I ordered books for the coming semester. He, and MIT Press, are to be congratulated for making this resource available to educators and the general public.