Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Top Ten books to read on the intelligent design controversy, 2009 #5

arroba Email

(Note: These are the key books, not science or media news. The Top Ten Darwin and Design Science News Stories for 2009 are here, the Top Ten Darwin and Design Media News Stories for 2009 are here, and my comments on the latter are here. Also, to get the links, you must go here.)

My comments follow.

5. Why Us? How Science Rediscovered the Mystery of Ourselves by James Le Fanu. The second international book to make the Top Ten list this year is Why Us? by James Le Fanu, a British medical doctor who publishes in peer-reviewed medical journals like the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine and the British Medical Journal, a columnist for the London Telegraph, winner of the Los Angeles Times Book Award for his book The Rise and Fall of Modern Medicine (2001). In Why Us? we discover he is also a Darwin doubter. Le Fanu’s main point is that the more science reveals about the most important question a human can ask—What is man and how did he come to be?—the more we have to admit that we don’t know. Le Fanu demonstrates this by masterfully recounting the epic demise of expectations that prevailed until recently for the prospects of three scientific enterprises. Darwinian evolution, genetics, and brain research were supposed to combine to give a compelling, coherent and united naturalistic account of man’s origin and nature. They did no such thing and the prospect of their doing so in the future appears hopeless. This is a great book to give your Darwin-devoted friends. Intelligent design is never mentioned, but the foundation for the materialist, reductionist world-view is systematically dismantled by a well-known authority on science and medicine.

[From Denyse: A sideshow with respect to this story is that New Scientist (the National Enquirer of pop science mags) had to withdraw – due to a libel threat – an article bashing design in which Le Fanu and I were the only persons mentioned. So the cry went up, who made the threat? I don’t know who made it, but I can tell you who didn’t. I am a free speech journalist who finds Britain’s libel laws a scandal in need of serious reform. So some have assumed it was Le Fanu who complained. I do not know, but the article is back up now, with a comment from Le Fanu, so I assume this is a minor happy ending. Libel law reform in Britain would be a major happy ending.]

Pick #6 is here.

Mung at 3, All writer/editors who want to survive must be extremely biased - in favour of a good story. The problem usually arises with the fact base, not with the - shall we say - "tell-ability". O'Leary
But I am hardly an unbiased source; I am a writer and editor.
All writers are biased. All editors are biased All writers who are also editors must be extremely biased. Mung
Thanks for pointing that out, Heinrich. Okay, end of story. However, I rather wish Britain would reform its libel laws. Keeping publications on tenterhooks for months is not the way to go, in my view. But I am hardly an unbiased source; I am a writer and editor. O'Leary
Denyse, this is what is written at the top of the New scientist article you link to:
This article was temporarily taken down on legal advice after New Scientist's editor, Roger Highfield, received a letter from a law firm on behalf of James Le Fanu, the GP and author of the book Why Us? Following discussions, New Scientist has now reinstated the article accompanied by a comment from Dr Le Fanu.
I think there's a hint in there about the identity of the complainant. Heinrich

Leave a Reply