Product Description

From a leading authority on the evolution debates comes this critically acclaimed investigation into one of the most controversial topics of our times

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #63209 in Books
• Published on: 2007-03-22
• Original language: English
• Binding: Paperback
• 368 pages

From Publishers Weekly
Though he takes a different tack than Wyller (above), Miller tries to draw a straight line between two apparently opposing ideas: the theory of evolution and belief in a creator. In a more humanistic account than Wyller's, Miller, a professor of biology at Brown University, explains the difference between evolution as validated scientific fact and as an evolving theory. He illustrates his contentions with examples from astronomy, geology, physics and molecular biology, confronting the illogic of creationists with persuasive reasons based on the known physical properties of the universe and the demonstrable effects of time on the radioactivity of various elements. Then standing firmly on Darwinian ground, he turns to take on, with equal vigor, his outspoken colleagues in science who espouse a materialistic, agnostic or atheistic vision of reality. Along the way, he addresses such important questions as free will in a planned universe. Miller is particularly incisive when he discusses the emotional reasons why many people oppose evolution and the scientific community's befuddled, often hostile, reaction to sincere religious belief. Throughout, he displays an impressive fairness, which he communicates in friendly, conversational prose. This is a book that will stir readers of both science and theology, perhaps satisfying neither, but challenging both to open their minds. Illustrations. Author tour.
Copyright 1999 Reed Business Information, Inc.

From Booklist
From the first publication of Origin of Species in 1859, religionists have heaped abuse on Darwin and his godless science of evolution. Meanwhile, atheists have rarely passed up an opportunity to wield Darwinian doctrine against religious faith. In an act of intellectual daring and spiritual integrity, Miller--distinguished biologist and devout Christian--inserts himself between the combatants to call for a cultural cease-fire. With scrupulous evenhandedness, he challenges both sides to reexamine their premises and subdue their rhetoric. The shrewd arguments that a new generation of creationists have marshaled against Darwin do not long survive Miller's incisive scrutiny. Indeed, he warns his fellow believers that those who deploy slipshod arguments and specious science deployed against evolution actually pose a greater threat to faith than do any number of fervent Darwinians. Still, Miller well understands the believers' dismay at the way some scientists have interpreted evolutionary science as a conclusive disproof of God, of morality, and even of meaning in the universe. Honest reasoning, he insists, will not convert evolutionary science into a warrant for materialistic atheism. Rather, he argues that in a truly open-minded assessment of Darwin's evolution, there emerges a living manifestation of the divine wisdom that made possible a universe of living creatures acting on unscripted impulses. A refreshing departure from the tired polemics of the evolution wars. Bryce Christensen

From Kirkus Reviews
A well-reasoned, intelligent text describing why followers of mainstream religions can also embrace the theory of evolution. Miller (Brown Univ.) presents the straightforward arguments that evolution is based on: Plants and animals show wide variation, and these variations must compete for limited resources. These statements displace the necessity of a creator to explain the origin of plants and animals. Miller argues, however, that this displacement does not necessarily disprove the existence of one. He relates his own experiences teaching introductory biology classes, during which students are surprised to discover that he believes in God. His arguments for the theory of evolution, while sometimes leaning toward the simplistic, persuasively point out that we often derive scientific facts (the composition of the sun, for example) from indirect evidence. The fact that we did not observe evolution taking place does not prevent us from supporting the theory empirically from the abundant fossil record. Miller similarly examines other arguments used against evolution, such as the age of the earth, punctuated equilibrium, and irreducible complexity, carefully examining each one. The picture he paints, aided by charts and graphs, is of evolution as a sound and proven scientific principle. Some creationists whose arguments are also examined seem to want to ``raise reasonable doubt against the theory of evolution, rather than present scientific evidence for an alternate theory. The author is disturbed that so many would have pinned their religious hopes on the inability of science to explain the natural world.'' He is very much aware that reasoned arguments alone will not end the debate, placing his hopes instead on his conclusion that western religions and evolution are not mutually exclusive ideas. Although sounding like a high school textbook at times, an honest and heartfelt effort to bring together two disparate viewpoints. -- Copyright ©1999, Kirkus Associates, LP. All rights reserved.

Customer Reviews

Best of Type
I have been intrigued by the on-going debate regarding evolution. As a result, over the last year I have read a range of books on the issue starting with Darwin's Origin of Species, and, including works by Pennock, Dawkins, Johnson, Behe, Dembski and others. Of recent works defending the theory of evolution Finding Darwin's God is the best that I have come across for a popular audience.

In the early portion of the book Miller provides a good and succinct case for evolution (something I find Dawkins incapable of). The author then addresses several of the different challenges to evolution (Young Earth Creationists (YEC), Johnson and Behe). He is most successful against the YEC, but his responses to the others challengers, if not decisive, are well articulated.

A point that is particularly well done is the discussion with respect to why evolution is such an emotionally charged issue. I agree with Miller that one of the causes of this is the extreme extrapolations atheists such as Dawkins, Gould et al make from what at the end of the day is a limited scientific theory (albeit an interesting one). For those unfamiliar with this aspect of the discussion, many "popularizers" of evolution attempt to use the theory to argue for materialism/determinism and eliminate the possibility of the supernatural.

In the second part of the book Miller goes on to argue that evolution and belief in God are not incompatible. In doing so, he touches on a range of scientific and theological issues including: deism, quantum theory, cosmology and apologetics. This part of the book was not as well done. I support Miller's general contentions but, believe that he tried to accomplish too much and got out of his intellectual depth. Although it had some good points the second half was repetitive and a bit disjointed. I will just offer a few comments on some of these latter arguments before closing.

First, Miller reads too much into quantum theory. Neither God's ability to act in the word nor free will are contingent on quantum indeterminacy. Readers seeking an introduction to free will can refer to sections in intro level philosophy books such as Pojam's Introduction to Philosophy (an excellent collection of essays on various philosophical questions). Additionally, similar to other scientific fields much work is on-going in quantum theory and many of the current limitations in this area could prove to be methodological.

Second, Miller's handling of cosmology and its theological ramifications are weak. Readers seeking a better understanding of this issue can seek one of Bill Craig's many excellent works in this area.

Third, it is not surprising that the author as a scientist approaches the issue from a classic modernist standpoint (i.e. science is the only source of truth). Much fascinating discussion has taken place around this issue and, some significant challenges have been raised by postmodern thinkers. For an introduction to postmodern philosophical work Stanley Grenz's A Primer on Postmodernism is simply outstanding.

Finally, the author gives to much credence to the threat evolution poses to religion. In contemporary apologetics the argument from design plays a limited role and, when used it revolves around the fundamental relationships in the universe not evolution (Miller touched on this issue). All but the most literal of Christians (YEC types) do not see evolution and a Christian worldview as incompatible.

In conclusion, good book, well worth the money. For those exploring the evolution argument I recommend it along with Behe's Darwins's Black Box and a work by Philip Johnson such as The Wedge of Truth (to get a fell for both sides).

Best of Type
I have been intrigued by the on-going debate regarding evolution. As a result, over the last year I have read a range of books on the issue starting with Darwin's Origin of Species, and, including works by Pennock, Dawkins, Johnson, Behe, Dembski and others. Of recent works defending the theory of evolution Finding Darwin's God is the best that I have come across for a popular audience.

In the early portion of the book Miller provides a good and succinct case for evolution (something I find Dawkins incapable of). The author then addresses several of the different challenges to evolution (Young Earth Creationists (YEC), Johnson and Behe). He is most successful against the YEC, but his responses to the others challengers, if not decisive, is well articulated.

Apoint that is particularly well done is the discussion with respect to why evolution is such an emotionally charged issue. I agree with Miller that one of the causes of this is the extreme extrapolations atheists such as Dawkins, Gould et al make from what at the end of the day is a limited scientific theory (albeit an interesting one). For those unfamiliar with this aspect of the discussion, many "popularizers" of evolution attempt to use the theory to argue for materialism/determinism and eliminate the possibility of the supernatural.

In the second part of the book Miller goes on to argue that evolution and belief in God are not incompatible. In doing so, he touches on a range of scientific and theological issues including: deism, quantum theory, cosmology and apologetics. This part of the book was not as well done. I support Miller's general contentions but, believe that he tried to accomplish too much and got out of his intellectual depth. Although it had some good points the second half was repetitive and a bit disjointed. I will just offer a few comments on some of these latter arguments before closing.

First, Miller reads too much into quantum theory. Neither God's ability to act in the word nor free will are contingent on quantum indeterminacy. Readers seeking an introduction to free will can refer to sections in intro level philosophy books such as Pojam's Introduction to Philosophy (an excellent collection of essays on various philosophical questions). Additionally, similar to other scientific fields much work is on-going in quantum theory and many of the current limitations in this area could prove to be methodological.

Second, Miller's handling of cosmology and its theological ramifications are weak. Readers seeking a better understanding of this issue can seek one of Bill Craig's many excellent works in this area.

Third, it is not surprising that the author as a scientist approaches the issue from a classic modernist standpoint (i.e. science is the only source of truth). Much fascinating discussion has taken place around this issue and, some significant challenges have been raised by postmodern thinkers. For an introduction to postmodern philosophical work Stanley Grenz's A Primer on Postmodernism is simply outstanding.

Finally, the author gives to much credence to the threat evolution poses to religion. In contemporary apologetics the argument from design plays a limited role and, when used it revolves around the fundamental relationships in the universe not evolution (Miller touched on this issue). All but the most literal of Christians (YEC types) do not see evolution and a Christian worldview as incompatible.

In conclusion, good book, well worth the money. For those exploring the evolution argument I recommend it along with Behe's Darwins's Black Box and a work by Philip Johnson such as The Wedge of Truth (to get a fell for both sides).

Contains many major mistakes
Although this book has much good material, it contains many major mistakes. For example,research by ophthalmologists has clearly shown why the human retina must be of the "inverted" design. Miller claims that this design is suboptimal because the photoreceptors are on the inside curvature of the retina, forcing the incoming light to travel through the front of the retina to reach the photoreceptors The photoreceptors (rods and cones) MUST face AWAY from the front of the eye in order to be in contact with the pigment epithelium on the choroid, which supply it with blood. The verted design claimed by Miller to be best would not place the photoreceptors in contact with their source of nutrition (the choroid). This is a serious problem because rods and cones need an enormous amount of energy for repair and they completely replace themselves at a very high rate (about every 7 days or so), due to phototoxicity, and other damage. Miller's design simply would not allow the rods and cones to function because of their extremely high rate of metabolism. Furthermore, placing the neural components of the retina in front of the photoreceptors does not produce any kind of optical handicap, since the neural elements are separated by less than a wavelength of light, so very little or no scattering or diffraction occurs, and the light travels through this area as if it was near-perfect transparency.