Intelligent Design Creationism and Its Critics: Philosophical, Theological and Scientific Perspectives (Bradford Book) (Bradford Books) [Paperback]

Rob Pennock - a philosopher at Michigan State University - has followed his extremely useful "Tower of Babel" with this collection of IDC pieces and responses from more "mainstream" scientists, philosophers and theologians. Pennock is unbiased, allowing both sides to present their case, and the collection contains many articles that were previously only found in academic journals. As such, the volume will be highly useful to individuals on _both_ sides of this issue.

As an educator, I have used Pennock's first book in class and both students and I have profited from his insights and clarity. I only regret that this volume was not in print when I ordered books for the coming semester. He, and MIT Press, are to be congratulated for making this resource available to educators and the general public.

None of the books written by proponents of IDC have EVER included so much as a chapter to the ideas of the opposition. Also, it often takes twice as long to refute cranks as it does to hear them out. Pennock allowed the best and brightest of IDs and creationists to contribute (Phillip Johnson, Bill Dembski, Michael Behe, Paul Nelson, Alvin Plantinga(who is a great philosopher regardless of the success of IDC)).

<The editor of the book is not a scientist and even the very title "Intelligent Design Creationism" makes clear that this book does not contain a scientific discussion but rather a religious argument.>
This is the most absurd argument possible. Pennock is a philosopher of science, and a good one. He does not make straw man attacks (unlike the IDCs, who employ that, argument of doggedness, and the inflation of conflict fallacy, amongst others). To say that he makes a religious argument is to attempt to deny the legitimate efforts of the book: to argue against the mathematical, biological, and philosophical arguments of IDC, while exposing the ulterior religious motives of the alleged "Scientific" movement. I only wish he would have brought in some theologians (aside from the esteemed Ernan McMullin, who contributes as a philosopher) to attack the theological presuppositions of those who support IDC.

<<I was going to buy this book--I confess I've only skimmed it, but wanted to first find out what the Intelligent Design people quoted in the book thought about it. William Dembski, one of these, says in a letter at arn.org, that Pennock and MIT Press took outdated, popular (not technical) essays without his knowledge or permission (legally), then gave critics the opportunity to fire shots without a rebuttal from him. >>
Dembski pulls this card every time he is rebutted. The funny thing is, he will go so far as to say at conferences that he will not accept questions after papers that he presents. He complains CONSTANTLY about the prejudice against him, yet manages to evade all chances available to him to respond to his "unfair" critics. Consistent with most IDC advocates, when his arguments fail, he reverts to appeals to sympathy by complaining about the "dogma" of the scientific community. Perhaps he is right; the scientific community is indeed prejudiced against those who not only fail to provide legitimate arguments, but would also seek to undermine the entire enterprise in order to advance their own theologically problematic world views.