Denying Evolution: Creationism, Scientism, and the Nature of Science

by Massimo Pigliucci

Book Overview

Denying Evolution aims at taking a fresh look at the evolution-creation controversy. It presents a truly "balanced" treatment, not in the sense of treating creationism as a legitimate scientific theory (it demonstrably is not), but in the sense of dividing the blame for the controversy equally between creationists and scientists--the former for subscribing to various forms of anti-intellectualism, the latter for discounting science education and presenting...

• Format: Paperback
• Language: English
• ISBN: 0878936599
• ISBN13: 9780878936595
• Release Date: June 2002
• Publisher: Sinauer Associates Is an Imprint of Oxford Un
• Length: 275 Pages
• Weight: 1.25 lbs.
• Dimensions: 0.6" x 5.9" x 8.9"

Customer Reviews

FANTASTIC BOOK for those new to creation-evolution debate....and more on Kent Hovind

I'd just like to start off by saying: I had to read 6 different books on evolution this past semester for college, and this was by far my favorite. Pigliucci gives a thorough account of the debate between creationism and evolutionism. He even goes so far as to summarize arguments on both sides, and then adds his own opinions. His book was not an easy read, but well worth it. The second thing I'd like to talk about is in response to the comments on Kent Hovind and other creationsits. First of all, let me say: Kent Hovind is TRAINED in debating...the people he debates ARE much much smarter (and have REAL PhDs....Kent Hovind conveniently is not letting anyone read his "dissertation"), but are not debaters. Evolutionists have evidence; creationists have rhetoric. To the untrained eye (which is unfortunately most of America), Kent Hovind and the creationists are winning these debates. That is, until you actually hear what they are saying. Kent Hovind is a slippery, sneaky man who doesn't know the first thing about the evolution's core statements. Or if he does, he ignores them to advance his so called "argument." He, like other creationists, have their own agenda. They DO take advantage of the fact that science doesn't have all the answers (yet), rather than formulating their own side of the argument. So why did Pigliucci lose any debates to Kent Hovind (if he did at all)? Because Pigliucci is working with FACTS which he cannnot manipulate (otherwise he would be discredited); Kent Hovind is working with anything he can get his slippery hands on. Interestingly, people still listen to him. It's easy to win a debate if you can pull things out of thin air, or things that make absolutely no sense in the context of the argument. I can't wait until I am able to debate one of these creationists because I won't let them win. It's like Pigliucci says...science is under attack, and it's a very scary thing. We need to protect science at all costs; it is the key to our future as a nation and as a planet. Overall, a fantastic and very honest account of Evolutionism and Creationism.

best book for an intro to the creation-evolution-design debate i've seen yet

I've been looking for book recommendations from people online in the creation-evolution-design debate for books to give to people new to the online debate in order to bring them up to speed as quickly as possible. This book got into my reading list as a result of such recommendations, reading it through was made possible but the well above average writing ability and the excellent way the author handles the material. At this point, it is my first recommendation to people joining the discussion, not perfect but very good for the purpose. It's a worth-the-time to read and understand 6 star book. The author seems to have two purposes for writing the book. The first is as an introduction to the CED debate, the second is rather muted but it looks like an argument for his more radical skepticism, which has as a primary target the skepticism regarding gods. I think he tones down what is probably a big thing with him, in order to reach more people and to make his book more successful. I see he has other books, i'll read then soon to see. There was only one big place towards the end that dealt strongly with the issue, i suspect that towards the end he had lost most of the more conservative believers in God anyhow, at that point talking to rather convinced skeptics. The other small places were as always little irritants but excusible in the mass of what is well done and worthwhile to read. It's addressed to interested parties, but i don't think many creationists will wade through it, just too cognitively dissonant for them, rats, they are the ones that need it the most, isn't that always the way it seems? A little sad, for of all the potential readers they are the ones who would benefit the most from the book. So it's natural audience is going to end up with those who are pretty neutral about the issues and are looking for more through the scientifically educated looking for good arguments to the skeptics putting it all together. It's not written to high school students but a little bit higher than that mythical general reader. It is not hard reading but scientifically based and despite the author's best intentions probably a harder read than most people are willing to give. Which is sad and says more about the general level of reading desire and ability than it does about the book. For it is a must read in the topic and as said above an excellent recommendation for the introductory book to the topic. The author is a teacher, from reading just this one book, i'd guess a very good one, a very concerned and involved one. He is also a natural debater and arguer, things i like but can only inspire to, however some people will be turned off by these characteristics, to them i'd say just ignore and move on, there is much here for you to learn. The structure of the book is, like the writing, excellent, well thought out and persuasive that the author is a born teacher with great gifts. I think the place to start for figuring out if you want to or will read t

A good book about science and evolution-deniers

Why are we still debating evolution, a topic for which the scientific debate ended once and for all in the nineteenth century? The reason is that an unscientific debate continues. Part of the problem is that many people have little understanding of what science is all about. My feeling about the controversy is that we have on one side some educated people who are actually using science to make progress in fields such as medicine that would otherwise be impossible while on the other side are those who complain that all these achievements are indeed impossible. Pigliucci starts with some of the history behind the creationism-evolution debate. This includes the heresy conviction for James Woodrow in South Carolina in the 1880s, and the Scopes trial of 1925 in Tennessee. And we see the latter involving a clear case of anti-intellectualism, where William Jennings Bryan appeared to favor majority rule in matters of scientific fact. In Chapter Two, we see David Hume's arguments against intelligent design. The analogy between the universe and human artifacts is weak. Intelligence is not the only cause of patterns (consider snowflakes). Even if intelligent beings do create things today, that does not mean that intelligence created the Universe. The origin of the Universe may be unique, and thus analogies to it may not be meaningful. The analogy between a human mind and a divine mind is anthropomorphic and leads to a finite God. We also see what evolution is. It is defined as a change in frequencies of the genes found in natural populations. As a consequence, it can also be seen as gradual descent with modification linking different life forms on Earth. Evolution itself is not a theory of origins, either of life or of the Universe. The next chapter has an interesting discussion of anti-intellectualism, including "post-modernism." Of course, to my way of thinking, anti-intellectualism simply attacks truth. However, truth is an inherent value, and in general, those who fight it on principle will not fare as well as those who embrace it. The author then gets into a good discussion of what science is, and what hypotheses, theories, and laws are. After that he covers eleven specific creationist fallacies, followed by three very misleading creationist claims. Next is a short chapter that mentions some errors made by scientists. Scientists can make mistakes, get defrauded, or have error imposed upon them by a government (such as Lysenko in the Soviet Union). Pigliucci shows that science, being self-correcting, eventually deals with these errors by measuring them against the real world. What recommendations does the author make? Well, scientists must take a more active role in their communities, and also organize "community days." We need to hire good researchers to do research and good teachers to teach. There must be continuing education for teachers. Universities must provide teacher training for professors and graduate studen

Thinking Rationally

This book is a discussion of the Creationist/Evolution polemic. It includes: * A discussion of the Scopes trial with William Jennings Bryan's final speech which is a critical read for the understanding of the Creationist mindset. In 1925 Bryan was saying the same thing Creationists are saying now. The argument is based on faith and not on a theory facts derived from over a century of scientific research. * The book proceeds to the history of the science/ religion discussion including a continuum of thought from "Flat Earth" believers to scientific adherents. Included here is a discussion of Hume's Dialogues in which he disproves Intelligent Design. * Creationists have long been guilty of muddying the waters of the discussion by using a pseudo science to bolster their claims. He discusses Intelligent Design which suggests that a force more powerful than humans created the world. Pigliucci renders the arguments impotent The arguments of William Dembski, Phillip Johnson and Michael Behe are successfully refuted. It is done it without malice but with authority. He discusses argumentative fallacies on the part of both sides. His discussion here is not hard on Creationist fallacies and easy on Evolution. * There is an entire chapter on the dangers of anti-intellectualism fueled by radio talk shows that essentially says that intellectuals cannot see the forest for the trees and that is when likes of O'Reilly can point Americans in the right (literally) direction. I do take issue with the description of Nowak, Page and Sigmund's study-"Ultimatum Game" to show how Mathematical evolutionary theory applied to ethics. Were this game played by a rich (proposer) and the responder poor, out of desperation, the responder may accept a much lower percentage as it would be better than nothing? This is similar to some labor/management disputes especially involving weak or nonunion employees. There are flaws in that comparison but it certainly happens that businesses are shut down at the owner's loss (as well as the wages of the workers) but ultimately, it is the workers who suffer more, often a total loss off employment while it is rare that a business actually shuts down as a result of a contract dispute. The book ends with a call to praxes. Now that we know all of this, what do we do with it? The author makes suggestions for the teaching of science in our schools. The most important point is that our youth ought to be taught critical thinking. It is having critically thinking educators determine what our children are taught. Education must be a concrete thing and not left up to those with an ideological axe to grind. The last chapter of this book is important. To live in a society where people are thinking creatively and with discernment then we must have schools that provide the environment for that. Without that we have graduating students who basically know only how to do what they are told. The book doesn't simply preach to the choir. Pigliucci rela

The Scientist Who Came Down from the Ivory Tower

When Massimo Pigliucci speaks about science and creationism, he knows what he's talking about. Denying Evolution reflects his expertise as both a scientist and a committed anticreationist. He is no ivory-tower academic. Pigliucci covers important bases. He sets the historical context of the creation/evolution controversy and provides an analysis of anti-evolution in its most current form: intelligent design (ID) creationism. Although he explains the varieties of creationism, he correctly recognizes ID as the most troublesome and discusses it at some length. He also devotes a chapter to the anti-intellectualism that has always plagued American culture, explaining much of the resistance to evolution. He follows with a chapter devoted to the nature of science. One of his best chapters is "Creationist Fallacies," in which he deconstructs eleven common misunderstandings of science and evolution. Yet Pigliucci is fair, refusing to exempt scientists from criticism. He chides them for underestimating the intelligence of creationists, recommending that scientists develop not only greater sympathy for creationists' desire for answers to "fundamental questions," but a better understanding of their own discpline's shortcomings. He offers practical recommendations for addressing the creationism problem with research about how humans learn. But he also recommends attitudinal changes----my personal favorite is "Scientists must come down from the ivory tower!" Finally, he includes valuable appendices: excerpts from David Hume's Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion, in which Hume dissects the argument for design, and William Jennings Bryan's last speech. Readers familiar with ID will note here many of the objections to evolution made by major ID proponents. The book is designed for the reader's convenience, with footnotes and visual aids: bold subheadings, numbered lists, and well-placed charts, tables, and illustrations. And throughout Denying Evolution, Pigliucci maintains his wit and good humor, transforming an otherwise disagreeable subject into a substantive and satisfying book. Barbara Forrest, co-author with Paul R. Gross of Creationism's Trojan Horse: The Wedge of Intelligent Design (www.creationismstrojanhorse.com)