It ain't necessarily so: An essay review of intelligent design creationism and its critics: Philosophical, theological, and scientific perspectives
Graduate studies at Western
Philosophy of Science 71 (4):593-604 (2004)
|Abstract||Nature exhibits a rich variety of adaptations. Cells contain complex biomolecular structures, such as proteins, that are exquisitely adapted to perform specific biological functions. Evolutionary biology explains how biomolecular structures evolve. Intelligent design creationists reject evolutionary explanations. They want to believe that all adaptations in nature are the handiwork of God. Their critics aver that “it ain't necessarily so.” The anthology under review is an excellent display of the issues between intelligent design creationists and their critics. I agree with the critics.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Sahotra Sarkar (2011). Sober on Intelligent Design. [REVIEW] Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 83 (3):683-691.
D. N. Sedley (2008). Creationism and its Critics in Antiquity. University of California Press.
Michael J. Reiss (2011). How Should Creationism and Intelligent Design Be Dealt with in the Classroom? Journal of Philosophy of Education 45 (3):399-415.
Chunyu Dong (2010). Intelligent Design From the Viewpoint of Complex Systems Theory. Frontiers of Philosophy in China 5 (3):461-470.
Sahotra Sarkar (2011). The Science Question in Intelligent Design. Synthese 178 (2):291 - 305.
Jeffrey Koperski (2003). Intelligent Design and the End of Science. American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 77 (4):567-588.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads94 ( #8,907 of 739,336 )
Recent downloads (6 months)49 ( #1,217 of 739,336 )
How can I increase my downloads?