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

An Anthology Edited by: Robert T. Pennock

**********************************************************************

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.

The case these "NEO CREOS" make against Darwinism does not rest on the authority of Scripture, rather, it proceeds from premises that are scientific and philosophical, invoking esotric ideas in molecular biology, information theory and the logic of hypothesis testing.

The NEO-CREOS concede that the earth is billions of years old, and that some evolution may have taken palce once the basic biochemical structures were brought into being. What they deny is that the standard Darwinian theory, or any other "naturalistic" theory that confines itself to mindless, mechanical causes operating gradually over time, suffices to explain the whole life. The biological world, they contend, is rife with evididence of intelligent design -- evidence that points with near certainty to the intervention of an INTELLIGENT DESIGNER.

So no longer is the GOD hypothesis required to explain the intricacies of the living world. Christian intellectuals who accept Darwinism insist that evolution still leaves ample scope for a CREATOR-GOD, one who got the universe rolling in just the right way so that, by sheer chemistry and physics, beings like us would inevitably appear without further supernatural meddling.

Despite the inqenuity of the neo-creos, the "Not Darwinism" part of their argument is pretty clearly a failure. If nature were fashioned by a hands-on Divine Artificer, it ought to exhibit a certain element of efficiency. Why then have 99.99% of hte species that have existed gone extinct -- including the poor dinosaurs, created only to be wiped out by an errant asteroid?

"Odd arrangements and funny solutions are the proof of evolution", states Jay Gould, paths that have a sensible GOD would never tread but that a natural process constrained by history, follows preforce.

If the proponents of intelligent design had carried their case, it would have amounted to a slam dunk for theism. With Darwin, you remain free to believe or disbelieve in GOD just as you like?

BTW: The book concludes with Pennock's "Why Creationism Should Not Be Taught in the Public Schools."

NYT 4/14/02 Bookreview Abstract (J. Holt)