What do you think?
Rate this book
Doubts about Darwin: A History of Intelligent Design
The Intelligent Design Movement is making both social and scientific inroads into the established "religion" of our culture--scientific naturalism. At its core is a group of professionals and academics who are skeptical of Darwinian macroevolution. The "Darwinian paradigm crisis" that is emerging is of critical importance because it raises questions about the origins of life and probes the deepest levels of what it means to be human. Doubts about Darwi presents a historical study of the rapid emergence of this movement by tracing key events, personalities, and sociocultural factors. Author Thomas Woodward poses the crucial How do scientists (and the public at large) come to be persuaded that they are in possession of solid scientific knowledge, and what effect do their "stories" have on their beliefs?
304 pages, Paperback
First published June 1, 2003
1 person is currently reading
125 people want to read
About the author
Thomas E. Woodward
4 books3 followersThomas Woodward (Ph.D., University of South Florida) is a professor at Trinity College of Florida, where he teaches the history of science, communication, and systematic theology. He is founder and director of the C. S. Lewis Society and lectures in universities on scientific, apologetic, and religious topics. He is an avid astronomer and has been published in Moody magazine and Christianity Today.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews
February 15, 2009
This book has to go in my top twenty if not my top ten. An unofficial history of the intelligent design movement, for me it also served as my introduction to rhetoric. This is another book that I can open to any page and be immediately captivated. Woodward is an excellent writer. Highly recommended and a must read for anyone interested in intelligent design.
January 16, 2018
The author is someone I happen to know (slightly) personally, largely because he got his Ph.D from the same university where I got my first master's degree and because he founded the C.S. Lewis Society of which I happen to be a member. At any rate, I mention this personal context because this book is an intellectual history of the intelligent design movement that demonstrates just how close-knit of a group it is, with some definite insiders as well as a small but not insignificant group of those on its outskirts, like myself [1]. The author wears his bias openly but also gives a thoughtful and fair-minded review of the early years of the ID movement and its roots in the post-Kuhnian world of the rhetoric of science. The author also manages an impressive task in showing some of the inchoate concerns that lead so many evolutionists to attempt to conflate Intelligent Design with various forms of Young Earth Creationism, something which has thus far been successful largely only in their own minds and, sadly, the justice system, to date.
At about 250 pages, including four appendices that provide deeper information about various matters of interest, this book does not overstay its welcome. It is concise but also thorough about the beginnings of the ID movement, in which the author has some influence, not least as the "court historian," as it were. One wants to see a sequel, in fact, to this book that shows the response of Darwinists as well as some of the more recent works in the field as well as some of the thinkers like Axe and Meyer whose writing has come a bit later than this particular volume covers. The author begins this book with a look at the incipient paradigm crisis and the awakening from a belief in the efficacy of macroevolution. A couple of chapters then look at Denton's landmark work Evolution: A Theory In Crisis, and its radicalism. Three chapters then follow that demonstrate Philip Johnson's initial forays into the science wars and how he earned a hearing as a lawyer and amateur philosopher of science. A chapter on the early 90's and the initial converts to ID precedes a discussion of Michael Behe and William Dembski's importance as early theorists of a positive theory of design that placed a scientific and rational alternative to the discredited evolutionary mechanism. The book then follows with a discussion of the recalcitrant aspect of creation that inspired intelligent design and its roots in the philosophy and history and rhetoric of science.
Although this book makes for a challenging read, not least because it is so detailed about the meetings between early ID thinkers and the rhetoric of their writings, this book is an essential volume to read if you want to really understand the history of the Intelligent Design movement as well as the grounds of its hostility to Darwinism in science and especially in culture. One can read a lot of ad hominem attacks on the movement from incompetent and hostile writers, but until you take the movement seriously and address its sound grasp of empirical data as well as its fierce and on-point rhetoric, you will be missing the boat in your understanding of it. The book is sufficiently detailed and ends sufficiently early as well that one awaits a sequel that will show the second wave of intelligent design starting in the early 2000's and progressing to this day, including a forthcoming treatment of Theistic Evolution that addresses the lingering and unfortunate attraction on the part of many for some kind of vain compromise between materialism and design that remains open largely thanks to the intellectual dishonesty of evolutionists who seek to corrode human dignity on the one hand while claiming facetiously that science only requires a methodological materialism on the other.
[1] See, for example:
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2011...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2011...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2011...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2018...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2018...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2014...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2012...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2011...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2011...
At about 250 pages, including four appendices that provide deeper information about various matters of interest, this book does not overstay its welcome. It is concise but also thorough about the beginnings of the ID movement, in which the author has some influence, not least as the "court historian," as it were. One wants to see a sequel, in fact, to this book that shows the response of Darwinists as well as some of the more recent works in the field as well as some of the thinkers like Axe and Meyer whose writing has come a bit later than this particular volume covers. The author begins this book with a look at the incipient paradigm crisis and the awakening from a belief in the efficacy of macroevolution. A couple of chapters then look at Denton's landmark work Evolution: A Theory In Crisis, and its radicalism. Three chapters then follow that demonstrate Philip Johnson's initial forays into the science wars and how he earned a hearing as a lawyer and amateur philosopher of science. A chapter on the early 90's and the initial converts to ID precedes a discussion of Michael Behe and William Dembski's importance as early theorists of a positive theory of design that placed a scientific and rational alternative to the discredited evolutionary mechanism. The book then follows with a discussion of the recalcitrant aspect of creation that inspired intelligent design and its roots in the philosophy and history and rhetoric of science.
Although this book makes for a challenging read, not least because it is so detailed about the meetings between early ID thinkers and the rhetoric of their writings, this book is an essential volume to read if you want to really understand the history of the Intelligent Design movement as well as the grounds of its hostility to Darwinism in science and especially in culture. One can read a lot of ad hominem attacks on the movement from incompetent and hostile writers, but until you take the movement seriously and address its sound grasp of empirical data as well as its fierce and on-point rhetoric, you will be missing the boat in your understanding of it. The book is sufficiently detailed and ends sufficiently early as well that one awaits a sequel that will show the second wave of intelligent design starting in the early 2000's and progressing to this day, including a forthcoming treatment of Theistic Evolution that addresses the lingering and unfortunate attraction on the part of many for some kind of vain compromise between materialism and design that remains open largely thanks to the intellectual dishonesty of evolutionists who seek to corrode human dignity on the one hand while claiming facetiously that science only requires a methodological materialism on the other.
[1] See, for example:
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2011...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2011...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2011...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2018...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2018...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2014...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2012...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2011...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2011...
January 2, 2016
This history of the Intelligent Design (ID) movement primarily discusses a conference that was a precursor to the movement and the four main spokesmen of the movement:
- Michael Denton
- Phillip Johnson
- Michael Behe
- William Dembski
The precursor conference occurred at the Wistar Institute in 1966. MIT electrical engineering professor Murray Eden, mathematician Marcel Schutzenberger and others had been modeling natural selection of random mutations using probability theory. Based on their results, they became skeptical of the mutation-selection mechanism and had determined it to be highly improbable for such a complex organ as the eye to have evolved by the accumulation of small mutations because the number of mutations would have to be so large and the time available was insufficient for them to appear. They met with prominent Darwinists to discuss their findings but were rebuffed. The Darwinists argued that the figures must be wrong because we obviously had evolved.
While completing his doctorate in biochemistry, Michael Denton, an agnostic, recognized that he complexity of molecular biology seemed inconsistent with the randomness of Darwin’s propose process of evolution. Inspired by this realization, he researched other areas of biology and concluded that Darwinian macroevolution, continuous evolutionary development through the selection of random mutations, is not supported empirically in any area of biology although he did conclude that microevolution is plausible. He had run up against what Thomas Huxley had called "the great tragedy of Science–the slaying of a beautiful hypothesis by an ugly fact," the extreme complexity of biochemistry. The product of his research was his book Evolution: A Theory in Crisis, which had two major theses:
1. Darwinian macroevolution, continuous evolutionary development through the selection of random mutations, is not supported empirically in any area of biology.
2. The priority of the Darwinian paradigm renders problems and anomalies invisible, a nod to Thomas Kuhn (The Structure of Scientific Revolutions).
Early in a sabbatical year, when he was in the process of deciding on a professional research topic, Phillip Johnson, a law professor, read Denton alongside the Blind Watchmaker, written by Richard Dawkins in defense of Darwinism. Denton persuaded him that macroevolution by natural selection was more mythological than empirical, and he dedicated this sabbatical year (1987-88) to researching the topic and drafting a research paper on Darwinism. This effort ultimately led to his book Darwin on Trial. In this book and his follow-up books, Johnson argues that every area of relevant scientific evidence tends to falsify Darwinism rather than confirm it and that metaphysical naturalism, the belief that the universe is a closed system of material causes and effects that cannot be influenced by any outside entity like God, protects evolutionary biology from questioning.
In his book Darwin’s Black Box, Behe, a biochemistry professor whose skepticism in Darwinism was inspired by Denton, built a case for the scientific consideration of Design by introducing the concept of irreducible complexity, which attacks Darwin’s own falsification test:
“If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down.”
An irreducibly complex machine is a system with several working parts such that the removal of any one part would prevent the machine from functioning. In other words, multiple mutations would have to simultaneously occur to generate an irreducibly complex biomolecular machine, comparable to winning the lottery, over and over and over. Behe gives examples of such irreducibly complex systems such as blood clotting and the flagellum and challenges biologists to apply basic tests to see which cellular systems are clearly designed and which are plausibly evolved from earlier systems.
After completing his doctorate in math and while completing a doctorate in philosophy of science, William Dembski proposed an explanatory filter based on probability theory for detecting design, not unlike other filters used by SETI, etc., to distinguish cases of intelligent action from cases produced naturally.
Significant historical detail regarding the motives of the primary spokesmen is included in this book because many Darwinists tend to dismiss their concerns out of hand by accusing them of being creationists and biased against Darwinian evolution. It must be noted that there are significant differences between ID and creationism. ID postulates a designer. It could be God, or not. It could even be ET reading Lifeform Design for Dummies while filming the reality show Designing Aliens. Of course, design by aliens merely moves the irreducible complexity problem somewhere else; it doesn't make it go away. From a biblical perspective, ID can get you to Romans 1:
For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth [l]in unrighteousness, because that which is known about God is evident [m]within them; for God made it evident to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. (Rom. 1:18-20)
It cannot get you to Genesis 1. ID postulates a designer. Creationism postulates creation as described in Gen. 1-2 along with Noah's flood. So, a creationist must also demonstrate that the present geological features are products of a global flood and fit such geological features as ice ages into that chronology. He also needs to explain how we can see light from stars that are millions and billions of light years away, among other things.
I found this book to be quite interesting and made a point of reading some of the works of the principle spokesmen in parallel with this book. I have been studying apologetics and am reading up on ID and creationism but am interested in seeing opposing views, as well. If anybody has any suggestions for further reading, please let me know.
- Michael Denton
- Phillip Johnson
- Michael Behe
- William Dembski
The precursor conference occurred at the Wistar Institute in 1966. MIT electrical engineering professor Murray Eden, mathematician Marcel Schutzenberger and others had been modeling natural selection of random mutations using probability theory. Based on their results, they became skeptical of the mutation-selection mechanism and had determined it to be highly improbable for such a complex organ as the eye to have evolved by the accumulation of small mutations because the number of mutations would have to be so large and the time available was insufficient for them to appear. They met with prominent Darwinists to discuss their findings but were rebuffed. The Darwinists argued that the figures must be wrong because we obviously had evolved.
While completing his doctorate in biochemistry, Michael Denton, an agnostic, recognized that he complexity of molecular biology seemed inconsistent with the randomness of Darwin’s propose process of evolution. Inspired by this realization, he researched other areas of biology and concluded that Darwinian macroevolution, continuous evolutionary development through the selection of random mutations, is not supported empirically in any area of biology although he did conclude that microevolution is plausible. He had run up against what Thomas Huxley had called "the great tragedy of Science–the slaying of a beautiful hypothesis by an ugly fact," the extreme complexity of biochemistry. The product of his research was his book Evolution: A Theory in Crisis, which had two major theses:
1. Darwinian macroevolution, continuous evolutionary development through the selection of random mutations, is not supported empirically in any area of biology.
2. The priority of the Darwinian paradigm renders problems and anomalies invisible, a nod to Thomas Kuhn (The Structure of Scientific Revolutions).
Early in a sabbatical year, when he was in the process of deciding on a professional research topic, Phillip Johnson, a law professor, read Denton alongside the Blind Watchmaker, written by Richard Dawkins in defense of Darwinism. Denton persuaded him that macroevolution by natural selection was more mythological than empirical, and he dedicated this sabbatical year (1987-88) to researching the topic and drafting a research paper on Darwinism. This effort ultimately led to his book Darwin on Trial. In this book and his follow-up books, Johnson argues that every area of relevant scientific evidence tends to falsify Darwinism rather than confirm it and that metaphysical naturalism, the belief that the universe is a closed system of material causes and effects that cannot be influenced by any outside entity like God, protects evolutionary biology from questioning.
In his book Darwin’s Black Box, Behe, a biochemistry professor whose skepticism in Darwinism was inspired by Denton, built a case for the scientific consideration of Design by introducing the concept of irreducible complexity, which attacks Darwin’s own falsification test:
“If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down.”
An irreducibly complex machine is a system with several working parts such that the removal of any one part would prevent the machine from functioning. In other words, multiple mutations would have to simultaneously occur to generate an irreducibly complex biomolecular machine, comparable to winning the lottery, over and over and over. Behe gives examples of such irreducibly complex systems such as blood clotting and the flagellum and challenges biologists to apply basic tests to see which cellular systems are clearly designed and which are plausibly evolved from earlier systems.
After completing his doctorate in math and while completing a doctorate in philosophy of science, William Dembski proposed an explanatory filter based on probability theory for detecting design, not unlike other filters used by SETI, etc., to distinguish cases of intelligent action from cases produced naturally.
Significant historical detail regarding the motives of the primary spokesmen is included in this book because many Darwinists tend to dismiss their concerns out of hand by accusing them of being creationists and biased against Darwinian evolution. It must be noted that there are significant differences between ID and creationism. ID postulates a designer. It could be God, or not. It could even be ET reading Lifeform Design for Dummies while filming the reality show Designing Aliens. Of course, design by aliens merely moves the irreducible complexity problem somewhere else; it doesn't make it go away. From a biblical perspective, ID can get you to Romans 1:
For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth [l]in unrighteousness, because that which is known about God is evident [m]within them; for God made it evident to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. (Rom. 1:18-20)
It cannot get you to Genesis 1. ID postulates a designer. Creationism postulates creation as described in Gen. 1-2 along with Noah's flood. So, a creationist must also demonstrate that the present geological features are products of a global flood and fit such geological features as ice ages into that chronology. He also needs to explain how we can see light from stars that are millions and billions of light years away, among other things.
I found this book to be quite interesting and made a point of reading some of the works of the principle spokesmen in parallel with this book. I have been studying apologetics and am reading up on ID and creationism but am interested in seeing opposing views, as well. If anybody has any suggestions for further reading, please let me know.
March 26, 2011
Thomas Woodward wrote a most excellent book
about the history of the ID movement and to a
certain extent the Darwinian movement as well.
The book looks not only at the history of ID
and Darwinism but also the rhetoric of both
sides as well.
Woodward is very fair to both sides even though he
himself is a Christian design advocate.
Lot's of info and scientific facts abound
in this book and at times it can get a bit
technical and boring as well as over intellectual.
I do like however how Woodward uses clever war
analogies such as comparing the battle between
ID and Darwinian evolution advocates and their
debates to battles in World War II such as The
Normandy Invasion.
Woodward talks a lot about Philip E. Johnson
and his book Darwin on Trial as well as Michael
Denton's book Evolution: A Theory in Crises and
Michael Behe and William Dembski as well not to
mention many evolutionists such as Gould and Futuyma.
Nonetheless, I give Woodward's book 5/5 stars
for his excellent writing and research into both
sides of the evolution, design and origin of life
debate as well as being fair and honest.
Note: This book was written in 2003 pre-Dover trial.
about the history of the ID movement and to a
certain extent the Darwinian movement as well.
The book looks not only at the history of ID
and Darwinism but also the rhetoric of both
sides as well.
Woodward is very fair to both sides even though he
himself is a Christian design advocate.
Lot's of info and scientific facts abound
in this book and at times it can get a bit
technical and boring as well as over intellectual.
I do like however how Woodward uses clever war
analogies such as comparing the battle between
ID and Darwinian evolution advocates and their
debates to battles in World War II such as The
Normandy Invasion.
Woodward talks a lot about Philip E. Johnson
and his book Darwin on Trial as well as Michael
Denton's book Evolution: A Theory in Crises and
Michael Behe and William Dembski as well not to
mention many evolutionists such as Gould and Futuyma.
Nonetheless, I give Woodward's book 5/5 stars
for his excellent writing and research into both
sides of the evolution, design and origin of life
debate as well as being fair and honest.
Note: This book was written in 2003 pre-Dover trial.
September 23, 2020
This book gave me so much to think about! There were definitely some parts of it that were harder to understand, and it wasn't a "light read". But that's okay because there were other things I did understand and that were helpful.
I am already a creation scientist and have studied much about it. So this book gave me a lot more insights. And I love how it explores the way evolutionary theory is taught. I guess you could say it basically decimates the evolutionary arguments.
The only thing about this book is that, even though the scientists featured are Design advocates, they don't necessarily advocate Biblical literalism or young earth creationism(some of them are not even theists). This is a key feature of the Intelligent Design movement, so I was expecting that before I picked up the book. I just want to note that I personally do not agree with a lot of the positions held and many of the statements made.
However, this book gives a lot of insight into these debates!
I am already a creation scientist and have studied much about it. So this book gave me a lot more insights. And I love how it explores the way evolutionary theory is taught. I guess you could say it basically decimates the evolutionary arguments.
The only thing about this book is that, even though the scientists featured are Design advocates, they don't necessarily advocate Biblical literalism or young earth creationism(some of them are not even theists). This is a key feature of the Intelligent Design movement, so I was expecting that before I picked up the book. I just want to note that I personally do not agree with a lot of the positions held and many of the statements made.
However, this book gives a lot of insight into these debates!
August 18, 2024
A BLOW-BY-BLOW ACCOUNT OF THE INTELLIGENT DESIGN MOVEMENT (circa 2003)
Thomas Woodward is a professor of science the theology at Trinity College; he is also author of 'Darwin Strikes Back: Defending the Science of Intelligent Design.'
He wrote in the first chapter of this 2003 book, "I shall now posit my central thesis about the Intelligent Design Movement: The narrative of the movement itself functions as the central integrating and motivating factor of all the rhetorical projects that the movement is pursuing... it is also a badly underreported phenomenon." (Pg. 24)
He states that Colin Patterson (author of 'Evolution,' etc.) "had agreed to help critique [Philip] Johnson's work ['Darwin on Trial'] as he developed his research paper on evolution... after receiving each draft from Johnson, Patterson would write back, encouraging him in his project and pointing out errors he had spotted... It also helped build a general respect for Johnson's critique as word spread of his practice of submitting to critical review." (Pg. 74)
He admits that in the two-hour Firing Line debate ['Resolved: That the Evolutionists Should Acknowledge Creation'] that the "Darwinists managed to rhetorically outscore the Intelligent Design team... [and] the Darwinists pictured macroevolution as something God may very well have established." (Pg. 133-134)
Those interested in the Intelligent Design movement should like this book.
Thomas Woodward is a professor of science the theology at Trinity College; he is also author of 'Darwin Strikes Back: Defending the Science of Intelligent Design.'
He wrote in the first chapter of this 2003 book, "I shall now posit my central thesis about the Intelligent Design Movement: The narrative of the movement itself functions as the central integrating and motivating factor of all the rhetorical projects that the movement is pursuing... it is also a badly underreported phenomenon." (Pg. 24)
He states that Colin Patterson (author of 'Evolution,' etc.) "had agreed to help critique [Philip] Johnson's work ['Darwin on Trial'] as he developed his research paper on evolution... after receiving each draft from Johnson, Patterson would write back, encouraging him in his project and pointing out errors he had spotted... It also helped build a general respect for Johnson's critique as word spread of his practice of submitting to critical review." (Pg. 74)
He admits that in the two-hour Firing Line debate ['Resolved: That the Evolutionists Should Acknowledge Creation'] that the "Darwinists managed to rhetorically outscore the Intelligent Design team... [and] the Darwinists pictured macroevolution as something God may very well have established." (Pg. 133-134)
Those interested in the Intelligent Design movement should like this book.
March 15, 2018
A great review of the development of Intelligent Design as a hypothesis which counters the prevailing Darwinian micro-evolutionary thesis prevalent within the biological sciences. This is not an easy read. Apparently, this work by Thomas Woodward started out as his PhD dissertation and evolved into this 248 page work? Consequently, Woodward's language is suited for an academic environment. Also, if you are a die-hard supporter of Darwin you will find this work quite controversial. However, I think, the author takes a balanced and transparent approach to an intellectually stimulating topic.
Want to read
April 11, 2025Book has been ordered ,will give review immediately after reading.
September 7, 2024
Fascinating look at the evolution debate; although the book tended to look at the rhetoric of the debate, it helped prove what creationists have been saying for years: evolution/Darwinism is a system of belief rather than science or evidence. For example, there was the 1966 meeting at the Wistar Institute, when mathematicians proved that the odds against evolution were so great that Darwinism is effectively impossible. The evolutionists "replied" by insisting that the problem was with the mathematicians, not with evolution itself. (Naturally, the evolutionists utterly failed to specify exactly where in the mathematicians' arguments the mistake was made.)
Another was Richard Dawkins' reaction to Michael Behe's book Darwin's Black Box ; rather than pointing to facts or evidence proving Mr. Behe wrong, Dawkins instead said that he should "get out there and find those evolutionary pathways". As Mr. Woodward pointed out, Dawkins didn't bother proving that such pathways actually existed but rather "automatically assumed" that they existed.
However, there were a few points that were puzzling, such as the author's statement on page 47 about intelligent design being "the first beachheads of empirically based antievolutionism"; he also stated on page 154 that two ID scholars "attacked the creditability of neo-Darwinism on strictly scientific grounds." At no time did the author actually prove that creation science is not based on empirical or scientific grounds.
Another was Richard Dawkins' reaction to Michael Behe's book Darwin's Black Box ; rather than pointing to facts or evidence proving Mr. Behe wrong, Dawkins instead said that he should "get out there and find those evolutionary pathways". As Mr. Woodward pointed out, Dawkins didn't bother proving that such pathways actually existed but rather "automatically assumed" that they existed.
However, there were a few points that were puzzling, such as the author's statement on page 47 about intelligent design being "the first beachheads of empirically based antievolutionism"; he also stated on page 154 that two ID scholars "attacked the creditability of neo-Darwinism on strictly scientific grounds." At no time did the author actually prove that creation science is not based on empirical or scientific grounds.
September 5, 2019
There is not much I would call "intelligent" about evolution or this book.
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews