AXE UNDENIABLE BOOK REVIEW PLUS
We will just not accept physical laws plus chance as explanations for the miraculous qualities of oracle soup (18). This “oracle soup” when cooled reveals instructions for constructing a helpful new gadget, and it does it every time it cools down! Skeptical?, the author asks, that’s because this fabled soup goes right against our design intuition. He speaks about the discovery of “a revolutionary new soup” (16). He sounds like Thomas Kuhn when drawing attention to pressures among the scientific class to conform to an institutionalized agenda (54) - like Michael Polanyi when he says that prior understanding is essential for deeper knowledge (61) - and gets a little Aristotelian (in the right way) when he quips that little actions are meaningful when “they produce a significant end,” one that clearly looks intended (67).Īxe is good at giving analogies to help his reader grasp his thesis. The author believes that “everyone validates their design intuition through firsthand experience,” and he thinks this validation is of a scientific nature (60). And we do it by following a “design intuition,” and by inventing stuff. I’m also totally fine believing that “Atheists have a pronounced leaning toward scientism” (7).Īxe engages the reader with what he calls “common science.” Common science is the sort of enterprise we all do to get along in life. He thinks evolution is wrong, that it “can’t possibly be defended as clearly and convincingly as it can be refuted” (59). The author notes the furtiveness of the spokespeople who try to shove evolutionist just-so stories down the throats of the populace without facing the arguments brought against them. Only in the imaginings of those who cannot see the difference between a scientific pronouncement and a metaphysical one does the idea gain currency and the power to veto competing ideas. It never is, in our day to day experience of living.
This book tries to get behind the sane intuition all of us have that incredibly complex functionality is not, and can never be, a result of any kind of unguided randomization. In the first place, Axe’s main concern is to provide Joe Public with an assuring and accessible guide on his own ability to detect invention no matter what the Science pundits tell them.
I suppose the nearest thing to it is Dembski’s book Intelligent Design.īut Undeniable is not simply a repetition of the type of arguments one will find in those books.
AXE UNDENIABLE BOOK REVIEW FREE
This book is a compliment to Meyer, but it is also a companion to William Dembski’s books, like The Design Inference and No Free Lunch. Axe’s work on probability theory and gene folding feature quite prominently in those works. Readers of Stephen Meyer’s two important books, Signature in the Cell and Darwin’s Doubt, will know the name of Douglas Axe.
0 kommentar(er)
