<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: But is it ideology?
Review: Even for a Darwin skeptic this is a useful collection of pieces dealing with Darwinism, and also includes material on Karl Popper, along with the philosopher of science Laudan on Judge Overton. The essays by Laudan and Popper are a reminder that when you actually check the particulars of evolutionary theory things don't really add up. Popper clearly pointed to the problem. But given the ideological fixation, and the infrastruture of sophistries to back that up, mere epistemological difficulties don't even register on the reality meter, long since switched off by Darwinists.
Rating:
Summary: Court Case Provides Framework For Evolution Essays
Review: This book of readings on the evolution/creationism controversy is set within the framework of the important case of McLean vs. Arkansas that overthrew an "education equal time" law in Arkansas in 1982. As one of the reviewers who actually read the book, I will say that it is quite worthwhile. The initial article that seemed to have given one exasperated reviewer such trouble was simply Bishop Paley's famous 1805 Blind Watchmaker argument for a creator as first cause. His inclusion of the eye as an example of argument from design is famous, and has stuck with the creationists ever since. Its inclusion in the book was important. Included articles discuss the history and development of Darwinian theory, the essence of evolutionary and creationist mechanisms (Yes, there is a creationist article in the book, by Gish), and the philosophy of science surrounding both evolution in general, and, towards the book's end, an extensive philosophical analysis of the trial arguments. I found the discussions of the trial to be fascinating. The sophistication and topics of the essays vary widely, and I would not recommend this book as an initial introduction for the layman. An excellent book to be read first or concurrently with "But Is It Science", would be "Abusing Science", by the noted philosopher of science, Phillip Kitcher. That book covers the basic mechanics and philosophy of evolutionist/creationist theory in any easy to understand, but reasonably thorough way.
Rating: 
Summary: Excellent Anthology of the Arguments
Review: This is a very good starting point for anyone interested in either creation-evolution or issues in the philosophy of science. The final section - "The Philosophical Aftermath" - is pretty tough going for philopsophical neophytes, but the rest of the book has excellent background materials and lucid summaries of arguments and relevant philosophy. (Since it's a collection of materials from various sources, the quality and readability do vary - the opaqueness of the text an earlier reviewer implied really only applies to a few of the many essays and selections.) The transcript of Ruse's trial testimony and his description of his involvement in the legal battle are among the best readings - concise, thorough, readable - available for clarifying why creationism is not science, and what it means to be "scientific".
Rating:
Summary: excellent, varied overview
Review: This is a very good starting point for anyone interested in either creation-evolution or issues in the philosophy of science. The final section - "The Philosophical Aftermath" - is pretty tough going for philopsophical neophytes, but the rest of the book has excellent background materials and lucid summaries of arguments and relevant philosophy. (Since it's a collection of materials from various sources, the quality and readability do vary - the opaqueness of the text an earlier reviewer implied really only applies to a few of the many essays and selections.) The transcript of Ruse's trial testimony and his description of his involvement in the legal battle are among the best readings - concise, thorough, readable - available for clarifying why creationism is not science, and what it means to be "scientific".
Rating:
Summary: Excellent Anthology of the Arguments
Review: This is in effect an anthology of selected writings dealing with the science vs. creationism issue. The author starts with Bishop Paley's famous blind watchmaker argument for a creator and brings the arguments up to date. As other reviewers have noted, the quality of the reading depends in some cases on the original author. However, Ruse has done a good job of including a variety of styles and levels, and a complete reading should give you a good overview of the arguments over the years. This makes a good reference book or a good reader for someone trying to familiarize themselves with the controversy. The extensive philosophical analysis of the trial arguments are indeed fascinating.
<< 1 >>
| 
