Defeating Darwinism by Opening Minds

Rating:
Summary: Sagan repackaged for Creationists
Review: I didn't bother looking up the references Johnson backs himself up with when he attempts to "defeat Darwinism" in this book, because he doesn't seem to have a lot to say. This book is only 131 pages long, and none of it is about the scientific evidence for evolution; it's all, as the title suggests, about "opening minds".

What are we going to use to open minds? Nothing original, apparently. There is a lengthy reproduction of the Baloney Detection Kit from Carl Sagan's /Demon-Haunted World/, with added snide comments about how Sagan should have applied the Kit to his own beliefs. There are essays on how big, bad scientists overpower the poor Creationists and how "modernism" is the religion of science, with all sorts of silly ideas which I have forgotten the details of because I returned the book to the library unsatisfied.

There are books that defend the Intelligent Design movement well, and this is not one of them.

Rating:
Summary: Could have been better!
Review: I read this book over four years ago and after recently reading a few more books on the Creation/Evolution issue, I dusted off my copy of Johnson's book and reexamined it. After going through the book a second time I was a unimpressed and didn't have the same respect for the book that I did after reading it the first time. Nevertheless, the book does bring up some very valid points and ones that evolutionary scientists need to answer.

For instance, Johnson shows how evolutionary supporters rely on deceptive evidence as an explanation for their views. When asked to prove that life evolves and produces diversity evolutionists point to the variety within the species' Canis Domesticus and Felix Domesticus, or the common dog and house cat. These proofs are inadequate because the variety of cats and dogs that exist today are only proof of variation and differentiation within a species, not of macro-evolution from one species to another. It is a scientific fact that a German Shepherd and a Teacup poodle are both members of the same species and are not different species. Second, and even more damning is that scientists appeal to this as proof of evolution when in fact it completely obliterates their view. The cats and dogs we have today are a product of intelligent design and selective breeding processes. Just visit any breeder and you will see that even today some breeders are breeding select dogs to produce a new type of breed. This screams intelligent design and completely underscores the evolutionist's argument. All of the dogs and cast we have today are a product of human intervention and planning not random forces at work to produce a fitter and better species.

Second, and most importantly, evolutionary principles defy the laws of thermodynamics; This is probably the most common argument used by creationists to discredit the evolutionary position, and with good reason. The second law of thermodynamics states that a system left to itself will continually move towards a state of greater entropy. In other words, if left to itself a system will become more random and more chaotic. This can be countered if an outside force is introduced into the system to organize it and restore order. This can be done very easily by adding energy to a system. This is how evolutionists will try and squirm their way out of this objection by stating that adding enery to a system will produce order out of chaos. In fact, Tim Berra attempt to do such a thing in his book, "Evolution and the myth of creationism : a basic guide to the facts in the evolution debate." Berra uses the example of receiving an unassembled bike in the mail,, he argues that left to itself the arrangement will become more chaotic and unorganized, but this can be altered by adding energy to the system. The energy you add is work from your muscles and tendons striving to assemble the bike, and thus adding energy to the system. Yet, this analagy is completely inadequate and destroys his whole argument. This process is one of logical and cognitive intelligent design. A human being, an intelligent being, decides to put the bike together and uses his cognitive functions to guide his effort to assemble the bycicle. This is intelligent design at it's finest and it utterly destroys the idea that an unassembled bycicle could be assembled by random chance. If a bike couldn't be put together without energy and design what are we to suppose to believe about human beings?

These are just a few of the arguments brought up in Johnson's book and are relevant questions to the debate. Just because science puts together a theory and supports it with some evidence, it does not make that theory immune to skepticism and questioning. If naturalistic evolution is true then the evidence will support it and it will prevail, but if it is not then another theory will replace it. The work of a man like Phillip Johnson is vital to the continuing advance of science. Although he may not be the most knowledgeable and scientifically savy person out there, he is only working to either strengthen the idea of naturalistic evolution or contribute to it's demise. Evolutionary proponents hate books like these because they question their findings. Science is not God and it cannot provide the complete truth, it can only give us tenable and workable definitions for the events and phenomena we see around us. Scientific definitions must constantly be restated, reshaped, and altered to meet new demands and evidence; Thus, the work of a man like Phillip Johnson is providing a benefit to the scientific community by pointing out the weak areas in their theories and this will in turn force the evolutionists to strengthen their assertions where weaknesses are inherent.

I have witnessed some intense and vehement responses against this book from naturalistic evolutionists who disagree with Johnson's work. They are entitled to their opinion, but their reaction is no better than the reactions of the Christian community of the early 20th century. The individuals who opposed Darwinian ideas being taught in the classroom. Now, the situation has been reversed in this society and the ones who originally preached a message of letting all sides express their views and let reason have the final say, these same people are now attempting to silence the indivduals questioning their ideas. People questioning evolutionary principles and pushing for an idea of Divine intelligent design should have their place to speak their views, and the evolutionists who originally complained about exclusivity and discrimination should stop being hypocrites and return to the principles and values believed by their predecessors.

Rating:
Summary: open minds
Review: I respect the thoughtful reviews put forth by students of Naturalism who read this book.

It was refreshing to read the open honest discussion by Johnson. I think this book is a must-read for anyone interested in the eternal questions of "Where did I come from; where am I going?" He represents the religious and supernatural position very well, and modern followers of Christianity, Judaism, Islam - in fact, anyone who believes in a higher purpose - would do well to read this book. It is intended for a simple audience, but the author has written other books for those interested in reading more about the debate between chance and design. It also is a great foundation to work from before studying fossils, and stars, and dates and various other evidences.

As an open-minded Christian, I find this type of book, one that is willing to enter into an open and honest debate, far more refreshing than the intellectual fascism written into most religious Creationism books and University science textbooks. I would be equally interested in an evolutionist's argument for his belief system that tries to be honest and openminded. I'm sure there are many out there.

All in all, I give Mr. Johnson the highest marks for a thoughtful, honest, and convincing book on the philosophies of creationism and naturalism. He brings a thoughtful approach and sharp mind to the argument that philosophers, priests, scientists, politicians, and scholars have been engaged in this past century and a half.

Rating:
Summary: Do check out his "references"
Review: If you've already made up your mind about the world around you and won't hear of anything else (because, of course, you are quite comfortable with your lifestyle, self image, morality, etc.) then you should, by all means, avoid this book. But if you are willing to open your mind up to see the intellectual dishonesty that we've all been subjected to since the day we were born, then this is a "must read". I guarantee that you will begin to view the world around you with a healthy amount of skepticism.

Rating:
Summary: Flawed Reviewing
Review: It's a little bit sad that some of the people who have rated this book negatively have used the defense "Johnson isn't a biologist; he's a lawyer and he doesn't know what he's talking about." Apparently a theory that's supposedly "rational" cannot be examined by somebody who is trained in law or logic. And apparently people who aren't lawyers or biologists can say a lawyer is wrong but a lawyer can't say that a biologist is wrong. Do you see a problem here? These people giving the book one or two stars say that Johnson is just merely trained in law. To all of these people: I ask what you are trained in, and if it's not biology, how can you defend it when somebody else who isn't trained in biology (but is trained in law) can't?

I also think it's pathetic to see people proudly proclaiming that they didn't finish the book or didn't look at the research notes and then go on to say that the book is wrong, useless, irrelevant, misguided, etc.

It's rather entertaining to see people who dislike this book because it abandons and questions naturalistic philosophy, but then these same people claim that it's not the naturalist who is narrow-minded, but the person who questions it. Great stuff.

And then there's one reviewer who says that by leaving naturalistic philosophy, religion replaces the beloved naturalistic way of thinking and superstition and witchcraft ensue. That's just what Johnson is talking about: people take an argument, and unfairly frame it so that science is "rational" and religion is "superstition" and "witchcraft." With those sorts of definitions, the evolutionist wins by default, becuase they rationalize religion away by claiming it to be a bunch of old, unreliable fables and myths mixed with wishful thinking. And you say it is the religious person that is narrow-minded?

And to the reviewer who said that Darwinism has stood the test of time: Darwinism has been around for 150 years. Christianity has stood the test of time, much longer than that. (See "The Case for Christ" by Lee Strobel.) Who's kidding who?

Now, on to the actual book itself. One problem I had with the book was that it was too short. I realize some high schoolers aren't willing to read a 400-page book about refuting evolution, but I wish it had been a bit more substantial. My other problem was the lack of evidence to back up a lot of claims. The evidence certainly exists. I just wish Mr. Johnson had provided an appendix or recommended books section.

For those looking for a powerful argument against evolution, read Michael Behe's book "Darwin's Black Box."

Rating:
Summary: Helpful Intro to the Evolution-Creation Debate
Review: Johnson wrote this book for an audience "not quite so familiar with university-level subjects, [specifically] for late teens-high-school juniors and seniors and beginning college undergraduates, along with the parents and teachers of such young people." (p.10) So it should not come as a surprise that this book is nowhere near as brilliant as his first book on the subject, Darwin on Trial. However, in that I consider myself to be a "teacher of . . . young people", I thought that it would be helpful to read this work to see if indeed it is worth recommending to the audience for which Johnson wrote. The answer to that inquiry truly depends on the individual; if the person, regardless of age, is a good reader and analytical thinker, I recommend that they pass on this book and go straight to Johnson's masterpiece, Darwin on Trial.

Defeating Darwinism by Opening Minds focuses more time on the methods by which one should approach the "evolution versus creation" question than he does on the content of the discussion. In his introduction, he outlines some of the philosophical presuppositions that keep some of the "intellectual elite" from even considering that "intelligent design" of species is a valid competitor to the theory of Darwinian evolution. While pointing out problems and inconsistencies with the presuppositions of the academic establishment, he concludes the intro with a very clear thesis of his own: "God is our true Creator." (p.23)

With his thesis clear, Johnson uses the rest of the book to inform his fellow creationists how they might identify the rhetorical traps that most Darwinian evolutionists are blinded by and use to unintentionally blind others. He points out how Darwinian evolutionists have succumbed to selective use of evidence (38), "Ad Hominem" arguments (40), "Straw Man" arguments (41), vague terms and shifting definitions (44), among other methods to try to prove their view of the origin of species as true. As the book continues, Johnson shifts from his focus on methodological inconsistencies of Darwinian evolutionists to an emphasis on factual inconsistencies that attack the theory's credibility. For example, he discusses how Darwinian theory cannot account for the "Cambrian Explosion" (60). He also writes about archaeologists' continuing inability to discover "link" fossils that could substantiate the Darwinian theory of macroevolution.

Overall, Johnson does a good job of showing that the scientific community's materialistic philosophy is not always supported by the facts often forcing the academic establishment to creatively position new archaeological evidence within a presupposed theoretical framework rather than allow Darwinian theory to evolve accordingly to real scientific discoveries. Again, if the reader only has one book to read concerning this subject, skip this one, and go directly to Johnson's Darwin on Trial. Defeating Darwinism by Opening Minds, though adequate, does not do justice to the brilliance that Johnson displays in his previous work.

Rating:
Summary: Frightening!
Review: Professor Johnson certainly knows how to craft an argument that seems plausible to those who aren't particularly familiar with science or the Theory of Evolution. He does this by consistently and aggressively attacking a strawman caricature of the Theory of Evolution.

For example, he attacks the Theory as one of random chance. And yet, he completely ignores that one of the primary mechanisms of evolution is Natural Selection which is decidedly Non-Random. Natural Selection (better termed Differential Reproductive Success) isn't some roll of the dice, but is rather an observable, mathematical and measurable quantity that maximizes fitness to the environment of the organism.

So too, he mistakenly (or perhaps, deliberately) misrepresents the Second Law of Thermodynamics to make it appear that Evolution stands in opposition to it. And yet, fifteen minutes of research beyond Johnson's misrepresentation at your local library will reveal that there is no problem. The Earth is not a closed system - (ever hear of the Sun?) - therefore energy is constantly being provided to the planet and such massive expenditures of energy is more than sufficient to account for the increases in order we observe.

Ultimately, books like this are scary because they give the uninformed reader a gross and dishonest picture of the Theory of Evolution. If you find yourself pursuaded by Johnson, please take the time to read why genuine scientists support the Theory of Evolution. It certainly isn't because they are part of some grand naturalistic conspiracy (as Johnson suggests), but rather because the vast overwhelming preponderance of the evidence supports it. Visit the NCSE (National Center of Science Education) and learn the facts.

Please don't let shams like Mr. Johnson fool you.

Rating:
Summary: Frightening!
Review: Professor Johnson certainly knows how to craft an argument that seems plausible to those who aren't particularly familiar with science or the Theory of Evolution. He does this by consistently and aggressively attacking a strawman caricature of the Theory of Evolution.

For example, he attacks the Theory as one of random chance. And yet, he completely ignores that one of the primary mechanisms of evolution is Natural Selection which is decidedly Non-Random. Natural Selection (better termed Differential Reproductive Success) isn't some roll of the dice, but is rather an observable, mathematical and measurable quantity that maximizes fitness to the environment of the organism.

So too, he mistakenly (or perhaps, deliberately) misrepresents the Second Law of Thermodynamics to make it appear that Evolution stands in opposition to it. And yet, fifteen minutes of research beyond Johnson's misrepresentation at your local library will reveal that there is no problem. The Earth is not a closed system - (ever hear of the Sun?) - therefore energy is constantly being provided to the planet and such massive expenditures of energy is more than sufficient to account for the increases in order we observe.

Ultimately, books like this are scary because they give the uninformed reader a gross and dishonest picture of the Theory of Evolution. If you find yourself pursuaded by Johnson, please take the time to read why genuine scientists support the Theory of Evolution. It certainly isn't because they are part of some grand naturalistic conspiracy (as Johnson suggests), but rather because the vast overwhelming preponderance of the evidence supports it. Visit the NCSE (National Center of Science Education) and learn the facts.

Please don't let shams like Mr. Johnson fool you.

Rating:
Summary: Garbage
Review: This is drivel, unworthy of the paper its printed on. Phil should evolve a brain.

Rating:
Summary: Attack is not research
Review: Why would a well-funded group spends all its time attacking scientific theories? Science is about expanding the frontiers of what we know - not making everything we know fit into our zone and strusses of comfort. Anti-evolutionism isn't science as it is not concerned with expanding our knowledge. It is at its core deeply reactionary - an expression of the inability of its protaganists and proponents to accept the irrelevance of their beliefs in the modern scheme of things. Since the anti-evolutionists want science to accept the possibility of "intelligent" causes for natural phenomena - how about looking for the "natural" causes underlying religious beliefs? I am sure they wouldn't want to apply such rigorous analyses to their own beliefs!

IF the anti-evolutionists are serious they should provide us with evidence of the "intelligent designer" like who he is - what his name is etc. or conduct some genuine research that makes their claim plausible. Attacking current scientific research may win them cheap adualation - but is not going to fool anyone about their calbre or capabilities.