David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
For many critics of intelligent design, it is inconceivable that someone once properly exposed to Darwin's theory could doubt it. It is as though Darwin's theory were one of Descartes's clear and distinct ideas that immediately impels assent. Thus for design theorists to oppose Darwin's theory requires some hidden motivation, like wanting to shore up traditional morality or being a closet fundamentalist.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library||
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Branden Fitelson (1999). How Not to Detect Design. [REVIEW] Philosophy of Science 66 (3):472 - 488.
Jonathan Loesberg (2007). Kant, Hume, Darwin, and Design: Why Intelligent Design Wasn't Science Before Darwin and Still Isn't. Philosophical Forum 38 (2):95–123.
Richard D. Kortum (2005). Niall Shanks God, the Devil, and Darwin: A Critique of Intelligent Design Theory. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004). Pp. XIII+273. Foreword by Richard Dawkins. £21.00 (Hbk). ISBN 0 19 516199. [REVIEW] Religious Studies 41 (3):357-362.
Stevan Harnad (2002). Turing Indistinguishability and the Blind Watchmaker. In James H. Fetzer (ed.), Consciousness Evolving. John Benjamins. 3-18.
Andrés Moya (2009). Synthetic Biology, Gödel, and the Blind Watchmaker. Biological Theory 4 (4):319-322.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads5 ( #227,338 of 1,101,667 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #178,427 of 1,101,667 )
How can I increase my downloads?