sarah_allen

Sarah Allen Allen itibaren 40050 Monterenzio BO, İtalya itibaren 40050 Monterenzio BO, İtalya

Okuyucu Sarah Allen Allen itibaren 40050 Monterenzio BO, İtalya

Sarah Allen Allen itibaren 40050 Monterenzio BO, İtalya

sarah_allen

Hank'in gerçeklik algısı oldukça yuhalıdır. Çakal konuştuğu iyi bir şey!

sarah_allen

I don't have the background to properly comment on the science, but it was mostly clearly presented. The solutions to the irreducible complexity issue haven't quite sat right with me, but they're neither as illogical or damning as Behe thinks they are. Behe does do a good job presenting his arguments both against Darwin and for intelligent design on the basis of science and not religion or philosophy. Behe presents a strong case, but he makes a couple fundamental errors. First, simply because something appears to be designed doesn't make it so (it might make it reasonable to believe in a designer, but that doesn't *prove* the designer exists). Second, there's some misuse of the panda's thumb and the anthropic theory here (and, in a sense, multiverse ideas). The big failure Behe has is his attempt in the final chapter to redefine the goals and limits of science. While I believe it's proper and good for scientists, as people, to look beyond the realm of the natural, to ignore the need for falsifiable claims, to be open to religious/spiritual answers, etc., it doesn't make that work and thought strictly "scientific." It's metaphysical, and that's fantastic -- I'd love to see more people making hard, concrete cases for something like intelligent design. But it's wrong to think that it's an error to do those things in the name of science. One of the strengths of Behe's work is pointing out that belief in intelligent design, creationism, etc. is not inherently foolish or irrational (nor does it always go hand in hand with young earth theories, etc.). On that level, it's a great success, but Behe ultimately doesn't pull off as much as he intends to.

sarah_allen

The content is more interesting than it sounds, but I wouldn't go so far as claiming it to be "lively". Admittedly, I did skip a couple of chapters depending on genre. Worth a read for those who find literary elements such as symbolism, allusion, style, and all that good stuff of interest.