Why Darwin Matters: The Case Against Intelligent Design

In "Why Darwin Matters: The Case Against Intelligent Design" Michael Shermer, publisher of Skeptic magazine, reviews succinctly both the overwhelming evidence in support of contemporary evolutionary theory and the pseudoscientific religious nonsense known as Intelligent Design, and then, discusses "the real, unsolved problems in evolution". Shermer, for example, has ample space to describe briefly Ernst Mayr's theory of allopatric speciation, and its relationship to punctuated equilibrium, the evolutionary paleontological theory developed by American invertebrate paleontologists Niles Eldredge and Stephen Jay Gould. But he also devotes ample space to dissecting Intelligent Design concepts like William Dembski's "Law of Conservation of Information", noting its irrelevance to both current mathematical information theory and the transfer and accretion of information - via DNA - in living biological systems. He offers an elegant overview of the origins and history of the so-called "Evolution vs. Intelligent Design Debate", devoting ample time to the existence of the infamous "Wedge Document" and the trial proceedings of the Kitzmiller vs. Dover trial and, of course, the harsh verdict rendered by Federal Judge John E. Jones III against both Intelligent Design and the Dover Area School District board. Shermer's terse tome is noteworthy for several reasons. First, he recognizes the necessity for engaging Intelligent Design advocates like Michael Behe and William Dembski, among others, in debates between themselves and knowledgeable critics on behalf of genuine science like Shermer, if only to educate public audiences on the nature of scientific inquiry, the ample facts obtained from genuine scientific research, and the disingenuous lies, half-truths, and omissions promoted zealously by Intelligent Design advocates. Second, he makes a most persuasive case explaining why evolution ought to be accepted by conservatives, as the agent ultimately responsible for the origins of morality in humans, and that "survival of the fittest" could be seen as a biological application of Adam Smith's concept of laissez faire free market economics. Last, but not least, Shermer contends that science should be viewed as being complementary towards spirituality, by engendering a "sense of awe" in viewing, for example, distant galaxies; therefore evolution can and should be seen in this very light. For these reasons, Shermer's terse tome deserves a place on the bookshelves of as wide a readership as possible.

This is an easy book to read on a fascinating topic. The author remains well focused on the theory of Evolution. But given this theory's huge impact, the author gets to study the linkages between many scientific fields. As a result, the scope of the book is very broad. Shermer with Sulloway developed a fascinating model that predicted whether one believes in God. It includes seven variables including: education (-) (the more education the less likely one believes in God); family size (+); conflict with parent (-); and age (-) among other variables. This model worked well in predicting religiousness among people I know. Despite the fact that virtually no scientists question Evolution 42% of Americans believe in Creationism. The percentage differs greatly even among Christian groups: Evangelicals (70%) vs barely above 30% for both Protestants and Catholics. The percentage also differs along political and geographical axis. Republicans are more likely to be creationists than Democrats. And Southerners are more likely to be creationists than either Northeasterners or Westerners. The theory of Evolution is well supported by a wide body of scientific disciplines. Shermer explains "convergence of evidence." This is where scientific laws are confirmed by more than one scientific discipline. Evolution is confirmed by so many different convergences of evidence drawing on data from geology, paleontology, botany, zoology, biogeography, anthropology, physiology, and genetics among others. Each science points to the conclusion that life evolved. For creationists to disprove evolution, they need to unravel all these independent lines of evidence. Shermer draws an interesting link between Darwin's theory of Evolution and Adam Smith economic theory. The underlying common concept is one of competition (natural selection in nature vs free market competition in economic societies). In the endnotes, Shermer reveals that Darwin had checked the consistency of his theory vs Adam Smith's. The author describes the interesting properties of Complex Adaptive Systems that can evolve in response to external changes. These include Consciousness, Language, Law, Economy, and Life. Thus, many different domains do evolve over time without the intervention of an Intelligent Designer. Life is just the one domain Darwin focused on. Shermer does an excellent job at reconciling the apparent opposites of the theory of evolution and the second law of thermodynamics (Entropy). "As long as the sun is burning, life may continue evolving... As soon as the sun burns out, entropy will take its course and life on earth will cease." The author reviews well several notorious legal cases involving the teaching of creationism in public schools. In each cases, the judges (even religious ones) have differentiated between science (theory of evolution) and religious beliefs (creationism-Intelligent Design) and sided with Darwin. Shermer mentions there are

The last few years have seen the explosion of the fight against evolution in the classroom, in the school board, and in the courts. This time it has been not creationism leading the charge, but rather creationism in a new costume: Intelligent Design. Shermer, a former evangelist and creationist, takes up the challenge posed by these anti-evolutionists. The fight is usually framed as science vs. religion, and the author does try to show that this is not a mutually exclusive fight. Evolution's ascendancy does not mean the death of God, though it is true that some leading evolutionists are also strong atheists (Richard Dawkins). A major problem is that evolution is framed in the scientific method, using facts, hypothesis, theories, conclusions and explanations. The intelligent design camp build their case on the negative - `Science can't answer this so therefore it is proof of ID.' This is not how a theory is built. It is true that the U.S. is overwhelmingly religious, and a majority of theses religious citizens are some form of Christian. It is unfortunate that for many the mindset is already established that it is "God vs. Science" in the fight. A recent study published in Science showed that only 40% of Americans believe in evolution and an equal 39% did not (the other 21% were not sure). In light of this, Shermer's book is extremely timely as the supporters of ID (and creationism) continue to wage a fight to discredit evolution. Shermer picks apart the ID theory's components point by point. He also admits that there are still outstanding questions today in evolution. No one is prefect. But this slim tome readably and succinctly brings the arguments under the spotlight, compares them and finds Intelligent Design wanting. If you are of a set mind on creation, then this book will not sway you. But if you are open to ideas, especially that it is not God vs. Science, then the arguments presented here may open eyes. Our education system needs to be aware of what the fight really is about.

Every now and then, a student or scientist comes to me and wants to express dislike for the theory of evolution, or to argue in favor of intelligent design. These people are often exceptionally bright, and they've often thought carefully about their positions. I've come to really appreciate their presence in my scientific and academic world, even though I don't agree with them. I've learned quite a bit from these people about science, spirituality, and life. And so, because of these people, I really enjoyed this book. The author takes a strong position, and I happen to agree with him, mostly. I didn't learn much that I don't already know because I have studied evolution and I'm already on his side. But I get the sense that I could share this with book with those who don't agree, and have an intelligent discussion about it. I really don't know how this book will fare in the hands of religious people who emphatically dismiss and ridicule Darwin and favor intelligent design, but I appreciate the fact that the author doesn't indulge in insults. He simply teaches the reader about the facts of evolution and the scientific enterprise. "Intelligent Design" simply crumbles away because there's no science to support it. Shermer is attempting to blast unscientific ideas out of your belief system, but more than that, he's painting a flattering picture of the scientific enterprise, and evolutionary theory in particular. If you fall in love with the scientific enterprise, and see that Darwin played by the rules, you'll be in good shape. Shermer's strategy is interesting. He'll probably never persuade many advocates to abandon their positions on intelligent design. The fundamentalists simply use ID as a vehicle for their entrenched religious beliefs. But if you believe in ID and are a rational scientist at heart, you'll be able put your beliefs under the microscope, while learning facts about evolutionary science. Much is made about the fact that the author was a born again evangelical Christian who argued against evolution, and then changed his views. The autobiographical content throughout the book is really interesting, and worthy of discussion. My sense is that Shermer does a good job of describing what many fundamentalists believe. He then goes on to explain how he changed his own views, offering his experience to the reader. Shermer has a background in psychology, and it shows. In places. He thinks a lot about WHY people believe what they do, and he refers various biases and heuristics that define our beliefs. He and the late, great Steven J. Gould wrote a book about these things previously. Compare WDM to the books that simply preach to the choir, and ridicule the anti-evolutionists. Daniel Dennett, Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins and others blast religion for various reasons. If you get a kick out of people who don't suffer fools easily, then these authors have what you are looking for. Dawkins' newest book, "The God Delusi

For several years I have planned to write a book on this topic when I finished my other publishing obligations. However, there is no reason to consider it now -- at least not on the topic of ID versus biological science. Shermer has done such a great job that I shall simply refer it to those who ask me questions realted to evolution, intelligent design, and Darwinian theory in general. It is a small (168 pp plus notes) work, but it covers the major points of evolution VS ID extremely well. Shermer does not talk down to those who claim to understand evolutionary science, but clearly do not. Rather, he presents the various criticisms that have been made against evolution by ID theorists and answers them in a calm and rational manner. He also presents the logic behind biological/evolutionary science in a masterful manner, directed to anyone with a high school education or above. He invites the reader to think about the arguments as he presents them, and carefully anticipates the traditional misunderstandings that ID theorists and creationists have ragarding science. I think where Shermer is at his best is in his discussion of the reasoning process behind ID theory and creationism. As a former creationist himself, he understands their manner of thinking. I have many times wondered at the reasoning process used by those who criticize evolution and science in general. How can it be so easy to overlook the vast evidence in support of evolution and yet so easy to swallow the fabricated objections made up by creationist spokespersons? Shermer's view that places the true creationist objection of evolution outside of science makes good sense. The argument has been made before, as have most if not all arguments made in the book. Shermer's ability though is to express the discussion in a clear, fair, and logical manner. I highly recommend the book to anyone interesting in the topic.