We checked; it’s Undeniable: How Biology Confirms Our Intuition That Life Is Designed (Harper One, 2016). But these sales don’t last.
The book is Outgrowing God: A Beginner’s Guide. Hart thinks Dawkins has finally found his authorial voice but you had better read the rest.
He starts out well but notice how Darwinism, flung into the works like an old shoe, undermines the topic completely. If beauty is really “in the eye of the beholder” full stop, there is really no such thing as beauty. If the “capacity for aesthetic appreciation” evolved “possibly involving natural selection,” then it is unrelated to the object and best understood in terms of how many children artists have.
Via the Institute of Art and Ideas, Massimo Pigliucci, Zanna Clay, Tim Lewens address the question, “Is evolution wrong?” It’s not a “PR crisis.” It’s a collision with reality.
By the way, if you are drowning in toxic intellectual waste generated by end-stage naturalism, reach out. There are many villages on higher ground.
Contrary to the reviewer’s complaint, the author is quite right to portray Darwin’s human evolution theme this way. The underlying assumption that evolution proved the right people to be superior has created a key difficulty in getting any serious criticism of Darwinism accepted. It made a thesis that seemed highly plausible to many Europeans irresistible. Put another way, the highly evolved human never seemed to look like Evander Holyfield, fitness notwithstanding.
Thinking about books recently, I recalled that philosophers Jerry Fodor (What Darwin Got Wrong (2010)) and Thomas Nagel Mind and Cosmos: : Why the Materialist Neo-Darwinian Conception of Nature is Almost Certainly False are examples of intellectually serious philosophers who are no way Darwin groupies.
We didn’t know that Suzan Mazur, author of Darwin Overthrown: Hello Mechanobiology, had interviewed Richard Dawkins in Manhattan (2008) let alone that Dawkins is now headed for the Mekong.
Yes, of course they do. But imagine anyone asking such a question years ago for any purpose except to show that it ain’t so: Stamp OUT Darwin Doubt!! was the permitted approach. But now we read doubt about Darwinian speciation in typical think mags.
Remember when DNA was Certain? When people were executed or spent life in prison on account of DNA evidence? “Your DNA is on it” was like Holy Writ. DNA was the guarantor of the Darwinian selfish gene.
And now… The worst thing that ever happened to Darwinism was DNA mapping.
Pardon the suspicion but some of us remember sneery “science-splains” at theistic evolution sites as to how there is a huge difference between chance and randomness—which sounded exactly like some scuzz claiming that there is a huge difference between taking money to keep quiet about wrongdoing and a bribe.
Well, for one thing, cleaner prose and clearer thinking. Maybe new, better ideas.
Much that is called science denial today is not “cynical and self-serving”; it is fed-upness with approved rubbish marketed as science because it suits a popular current philosophy.
It’s been so easy to get people to take the claims for design in nature seriously after they’ve witnessed a huge dump of new atheism. But hey, the easy stuff never lasts.
The odd thing is that one part of the Templeton group is also funding things that should interest Jerry, for example the quest for an explanation of consciousness.