Darwinism, Design, and Public Education (Rhetoric and Public Affairs Series) | 
| Creators: John Angus Campbell, Stephen C. Meyer
Publisher: Michigan State University Press
Category: Book
List Price: $28.95
Buy New: $18.13
You Save: $10.82 (37%)
New (16) Used (10) from $16.50
Avg. Customer Rating:  14 reviews
Sales Rank: 596934
Media: Paperback
Number Of Items: 1
Pages: 544
Shipping Weight (lbs): 2
Dimensions (in): 8.9 x 6 x 1.4
ISBN: 0870136755
Dewey Decimal Number: 576.8071
EAN: 9780870136757
ASIN: 0870136755
Publication Date: June 2004
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
Shipping: Expedited shipping available
Condition: Sold with pride and shipped with confirmation for US addresses. No publisher marks, no shelf wear.
|
| Also Available In:
|
| Similar Items:
|
| Customer Reviews: Read 9 more reviews...
 Another Grossly Distorted, Quite Biased, Tome In Praise of So-Called "Intelligent Design" May 27, 2007
9 out of 30 found this review helpful
This miserable collection of papers is yet another blatant attempt by Intelligent Design advocates to demonstrate that their idea has ample scientific validity and is not religiously-oriented at all; a conclusion that is quite untenable to hold in light of the harsh, negative verdict rendered against Intelligent Design by Republican Federal Judge John Jones in his ruling in favor of the plaintiffs in the 2005 Kitzmiller vs. Dover Area School District trial (He concluded that Intelligent Design was a religious idea masquerading as science; a verdict which two distinguished conservative commentators, Charles Krauthammer and George Will, applauded soon thereafter in their newspaper columns published originally in The Washington Post.). Hoping to persuade a potential audience that this volume is balanced, the editors, John Angus Campbell and Stephen C. Meyer (who is a key member of the Seattle, Washington-based Discovery Institute's staff; the same institute which has provided ample lavish funding on behalf of Intelligent Design and its advocates for nearly a decade), have also included some papers by authors harshly critical of Intelligent Design, especially philosopher Michael Ruse's. However, don't be deceived thinking that you will indeed get a balanced presention, both pro and con, on the Intelligent Design" issue, when the book's real raison d'etre is to offer a defense of Intelligent Design for both scientific and science educational reasons. Most of the issues covered are done admirably well in Robert Pennock's "Tower of Babel" and especially, Eugenie Scott's "Evolutionism vs. Creationism", which are far better examples of serious scholarship devoted to this issue than virtually all of the papers published in this anthology ( I also recommend any of the books I've cited in my Amazon.com Listmania! List (http://www.amazon.com/Why-Evolution-Is-Science-amp-Creationism-Isn-t/lm/R1288DTMHQJI13/ref=cm_lm_byauthor_title_full/105-5149275-4621242). Otherwise, if you insist on purchasing this book, then I would strongly advise instead, to think of acquiring one devoted to Klingon Cosmology, since Klingon Cosmology, like Intelligent Design, depends solely upon faith, not reason, in articulating and defending its principles.
 A Balanced Volume with Arguments from Scientists and other Scholars Both For and Against Teaching Intelligent Design in Schools June 21, 2006
4 out of 12 found this review helpful
This balanced volume contains essays by both supporters and critics debating intelligent design and whether design should be allowed in public school science classes. The scholars approach the question from the standpoints of constitutional law, philosophy, rhetoric, education, and science.
Legal scholar David DeWolf argues that teachers should have the academic freedom to teach intelligent design in the classroom because of its empirical, nonreligious basis. John Angus Campbell sees intelligent design as the pedagogical and historical antithesis to Neo-Darwinism, both of which must be taught if students are to properly understand biological origins. Pro-design technical arguments reach into many forums: William Dembski finds that many scientific fields already use design reasoning to detect design via "specified complexity," Stephen Meyer applies such reasoning to argue for design of the encoded information in DNA and the origin of life, while Michael Behe argues that irreducibly complex molecular machines were designed. Stephen Meyer, Paul Chien and others argue that there is design indicated by the rapid origin of the animal phyla during the Cambrian explosion. And Paul Nelson, and Jonathan Wells argue that design is the best explanation for homology and genetic convergence in biology.
Then, too, are the articles critical of intelligent design. Celeste Michelle Condit argues that the natural origin of rock bridges provide a useful analogy to defeat Behe's arguments about the supposed unevolvability of irreducibly complex machines. Bruce H. Weber contends that we should not rule out evolutionary explanations, arguing that there are many promising accounts for biochemical evolution in the scientific literature. Massimo Pigliucci attacks the funding sources of design proponents and suggests that natural selection can produce specified complexity. Michael Ruse proposes that critics are far more valuable in intellectual debate than are friends, and goes on to call design "religion," and explains that neither religiously oriented "popular" versions of Darwinism nor intelligent design belong in the classroom. Ruse contends that the science classroom should only teach "professional Darwinism."
This book provides an excellent and readable source of primary literature for and against intelligent design.
why state religion? February 22, 2006
5 out of 9 found this review helpful
I intend to make only several "quick" observations:
Since Denton's Nature's Destiny and Behe's work, and now this current book, for example, it would seem that any "objective" person would be impressed with the material presented. But that's the issue: objectivity.
How a "coldly" objective scientific type such as Sullivan would take personal and emotional umbrage at this issue- in a meaningless universe- strikes me as truly "funny". Afterall, then, why or how would it make any difference? Would it enhance his evolutionary fitness for survival? But that leads me to what I consider to be the most significant point. Let the "sullivans" of this world teach their children what they wish and allow us the freedom to inform our children of all the evidence- without sarcasm and name-calling. Better yet, eliminate the problem completely by ceasing to assume or posit the "state" educational system altogether! Afterall, is this really about whether Sullivan's world-view or mine will be- by the power of the State- imposed on my children? Why in heaven's name do we subject our children to such mental brutality? Are they the "football" in this "game"?
Scaling the Mount Everest of assumptions made by dogmatic neo-Darwinians December 7, 2005
13 out of 19 found this review helpful
It is refreshing that at least some healthy discussion has commenced regarding the literal plethora of misinformation on which most of the assumptions regarding Darwin's theory on the origin of the species are based. This book and others of its kind, though not exhaustive enough to tackle in only a single volume every aspect of the countless controversies surrounding Intelligent Design vs. Darwinism, nicely inspires interested parties to adhere to the principle of searching for truth, not simply accepting verbatim what mainstream academia has been promoting over the past century.
The fact is, most proponents of macro evolutionist theory, when thoroughly questioned, do not even know what it is, have never taken a biology course, nor could they explain the difference between natural selection itself (aka. adaptation, a phenomenon which can be empirically observed as occurring in nature) and the theory that entirely new species of living creatures make the quantum leap from a previous species to a complete other via the motor of natural selection (merely a theoretical model used to explain the broad variation of species, which is not able to be empirically proven through simple observation, only assumed through deduction).
One such lay proponent of neo-Darwinist theory has been busily flaming this very review board. His name is Tom Sullivan of York, Pennsylvania. Due to a sheer lack of understanding of what ID is and an absence of any semblance of objectivity, his reviews are absolutely useless to sincerely interested observers. Instead of simply objectively reporting on the content or value of books centering on the topic of Intelligent Design, he angrily resorts to hyperbole and slander, even basing one of his statements regarding "Christians" on a myth about the flat earth theory, which was maliciously created by proponents of Darwinism themselves, in an attack on organized religion at that time. This is the typical mindset in the world today, which, ironically, has always been the fearful reaction of anyone troubled by attacks on the status quo. This book, and others like it, are at least make a positive step toward dismantling such unhealthy attitudes and is a refreshing attempt at civility.
Even though such attempts may strike fear into the hearts of the likes of Patrick Sullivan, who has cut and pasted a nearly identical review onto this site concerning every single book in this series, the painful but necessary job of blowing over card houses is appreciated by some.
As mentioned above, what should be embarrassing to Mr. Sullivan (assuming he has any self respect) and to others like him is that they are not refuting Intelligent Design at all by slandering young-earth creationists or erroneously stating that Christians once believed the earth was flat.
Intelligent Design, in its principles, contains elements pertaining to the science of observation which are imperative to fields such as forensic science and archeology, to name only two. The proponents of Intelligent Design he and others like him attack cannot be lumped in with creationists in general, and doing so only demonstrates sheer ignorance, or bigoted dismissal, of the distinctions between these groups.
If our quest is to eventually obtain a presentation of truth that is as unbiased as possible, then, against the backdrop of advancements in technology which our information age brings with it, Darwin's theory must be revisited and critically analyzed on entirely new bases - if only to dispel misconceptions, poor assumptions, or worse - myths.
As far as the assertion is concerned that holding the earth to be flat was formerly required in order to ascribe to the Christian faith, here's an excerpt by Wells himself, refuting such claims:
"According to the standard story, Christians used to believe for biblical reasons that the Earth is flat. When modern science demonstrated that the Earth is actually a sphere, that belief became a legitimate target for ridicule. Now, since modern science has likewise demonstrated the truth of Darwin's theory (so the story goes), critics of Darwinism are just as silly as flat- Earthers.
But the story is totally false. It was pure fiction until it was turned into a phony historical claim by late-19th century Darwinists who used it to slander Christians.
The spherical shape of the Earth was known to the ancient Greeks, who even made some pretty good estimates of its circumference. Christian theologians likewise knew that the Earth was a sphere. The only two Christian writers who seem to have advocated a flat Earth were a 4th-century heretic, Lactantius, and an obscure 6th-century eccentric, Cosmas Indicopleustes.
The modern Flat Earth Myth originated with the 19th-century American writer Washington Irving. In his fictional History of the Life and Voyages of Christopher Columbus (1828), Irving wrote that flat-Earth churchmen had opposed Columbus on the grounds that he would fall off the edge of the Earth if he tried to sail across the Atlantic. In actuality, Columbus's opponents knew not only that the Earth is a sphere, but also approximately how big it is. Since they (like Columbus) knew nothing about the Americas, it was quite reasonable for them to believe that a voyage to the Far East would not be a good investment.
The Flat Earth Myth remained clearly in the realm of fiction until Darwin published his Origin of Species in 1859. Then two of Darwin's followers presented it as actual history in books that defended Darwinism against imaginary attacks from ignorant Christians: John Draper's The History of the Conflict Between Religion and Science (1874), and Andrew Dickson White's A History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom (1896). The pseudo-historical propaganda of Draper and White has been thoroughly discredited by twentieth-century historians.
Apparently, however, Graur doesn't read much history. Instead, he unknowingly caricatures critics of Darwinism on the basis of a myth that the Darwinists themselves fabricated.
Now THAT's funny!"
ID-iotic trash August 30, 2005
11 out of 51 found this review helpful
This book is more ID-iotic trash from the Intelligent Design (ID) propaganda machine at the primary ID think tank, the Discovery Institute. Did you know that the Discovery Institute spends far more money on advertising and self-promotion than they do on actual scientific experiments? What does that tell you?
Why anyone pays any attention to this religious trash is beyond me. Don't people ever learn? Ignorant Christians once believed that Earth was flat. After several centuries, they finally abandoned that foolishness, but still maintained that Earth was stationary and that the sun orbited Earth, not vice versa. Today, the radical, religious right, descendants of those earlier ignoramuses, are demonstrating their "new and improved" ignorance by advocating this anti-evolutionist ID-iocy.
The ID-iocy of ID was on open display in the science curriculum hearings that the Kansas Board of Education held last May. ID luminaries Meyer (a co-editor of this collection), Behe, Calvert, Harris, Thaxton, Wells, and a host of lesser lights (dim bulbs indeed) testified for ID. The ID-iocy of their testimony has to be seen to be believed. You can read a summary of all of their testimony on the creation/evolution forum maintained by the West Virginia Gazette. (Point your browser to wvgazettemail, then scroll through the list of "Sections" on the left side of the screen. "The Gazette Forums" is near the bottom.
Be prepared to be amazed, and I don't mean that in a good way. And feel free to add your own comments!
|
|
|
