Book contents
- The Cambridge History of Atheism
- The Cambridge History of Atheism
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Acknowledgments
- Contributors
- Introduction
- Part I Preliminaries
- Part II Atheisms in History
- Part III Reformation, Renaissance, Enlightenment
- Part IV Classical Modernity: Philosophical and Scientific Currents
- Part V Classical Modernity: Social and Political Currents
- Part VI Twentieth and Twenty-First Centuries: Intellectual and Artistic Currents
- 32 Analytic Philosophy
- 33 Naturalism
- 34 Existentialism
- 35 Atheism and Postmodern Philosophies
- 36 Ayn Rand and Objectivism
- 37 Darwinism
- 38 Literature
- 39 Music
- 40 Visual Arts
- 41 Film and Television
- Part VII Lived Atheism in the Twentieth- and Twenty-First Centuries: Case-Studies
- Part VIII Emerging Atheisms in the Twenty-First Century
- Part IX Conclusion
- Index
- References
37 - Darwinism
from Part VI - Twentieth and Twenty-First Centuries: Intellectual and Artistic Currents
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 25 September 2021
Book contents
- The Cambridge History of Atheism
- The Cambridge History of Atheism
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Acknowledgments
- Contributors
- Introduction
- Part I Preliminaries
- Part II Atheisms in History
- Part III Reformation, Renaissance, Enlightenment
- Part IV Classical Modernity: Philosophical and Scientific Currents
- Part V Classical Modernity: Social and Political Currents
- Part VI Twentieth and Twenty-First Centuries: Intellectual and Artistic Currents
- 32 Analytic Philosophy
- 33 Naturalism
- 34 Existentialism
- 35 Atheism and Postmodern Philosophies
- 36 Ayn Rand and Objectivism
- 37 Darwinism
- 38 Literature
- 39 Music
- 40 Visual Arts
- 41 Film and Television
- Part VII Lived Atheism in the Twentieth- and Twenty-First Centuries: Case-Studies
- Part VIII Emerging Atheisms in the Twenty-First Century
- Part IX Conclusion
- Index
- References
Summary
Darwinian evolution is an overarching explanatory framework that makes sense of the characteristic patterns of the biological world. Evolutionary science is a progressive research program that is as well-confirmed as findings in other scientific disciplines. In this sense, it is not different from chemistry or physics. There is one significant difference, however, in that evolution continues to be subjected to regular attacks from some religious quarters, especially in the United States, where the issues have had considerable political, legal, and sociocultural significance.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Cambridge History of Atheism , pp. 666 - 685Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2021
References
References
Behe, M. 1996. Darwin’s Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
Boucher, S. C. 2019. “Methodological naturalism in the sciences.” International Journal for the Philosophy of Religion. DOI: 10.1007/s11153-019-09728-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boudry, M., Blancke, S., Braeckman, J. 2010. “How not to attack intelligent design creationism: philosophical misconceptions about methodological naturalism.” Foundations of Science 15(3), 227–44.Google Scholar
Bowler, P. J. 1983. The Eclipse of Darwinism: Anti-Darwinian Evolution Theories in the Decades around 1900. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Cepelewicz, J. 2019. “Fossil DNA reveals new twists in modern human origins.” Quanta Magazine, 29 August. Available at: www.quantamagazine.org/fossil-dna-reveals-new-twists-in-modern-human-origins-20190829/#.Google Scholar
Collins, F. S. 2006. The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
Coyne, J. 2017. “Theistic evolution is not science: more misrepresentation of a survey on British beliefs about evolution.” Why Evolution is True blog. Available at: https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2017/09/19/theistic-evolution-is-not-science-more-misrepresentation-of-a-survey-on-british-beliefs-about-evolution.Google Scholar
Darwin, C. 1964 [1859]. On the Origin of Species. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press (facsimile of the 1st edition).Google Scholar
Darwin, C. 1866. Letter to Mary E. Boole. Darwin Correspondence Project. Available at: www.darwinproject.ac.uk/letter/DCP-LETT-5307.xml.Google Scholar
Darwin, C. 1879. Letter to John Fordyce. Darwin Correspondence Project. Available at: www.darwinproject.ac.uk/letter/DCP-LETT-12041.xml.Google Scholar
Dembski, W. A. 1995. “What every theologian should know about creation.” Center for Interdisciplinary Studies Transactions 3(2), 1–8.Google Scholar
Dowd, M. 2007. Thank God for Evolution: How the Marriage of Science and Religion Will Transform Your Life and Our World. New York: Viking Press.Google Scholar
Grudem, W. 2017. “Biblical and theological introduction: the incompatibility of evolution with the biblical account of creation and with important Christian doctrines,” in Moreland, J. P., Meyer, S. C., Shaw, C., Gauger, A. K., and Grudem, W. (eds.), Theistic Evolution: A Scientific, Philosophical and Theological Critique. Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 61–81.Google Scholar
Gundlach, B. J. 1997. “McCosh and Hodge on evolution: a combined legacy.” The Journal of Presbyterian History 75(2), 85–102.Google Scholar
Haught, J. F. 2010. Making Sense of Evolution: Darwin, God, and the Drama of Life. Louisville, KY: John Knox Press.Google Scholar
Johnson, P. E. 1990. Evolution as Dogma: The Establishment of Naturalism. Dallas, TX: Haughton Publishing Company.Google Scholar
Johnson, P. E. 1995. Reason in the Balance: The Case against Naturalism in Science, Law, and Education. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.Google Scholar
Larson, E. J. 1997. Summer for the Gods: The Scopes Trial and America’s Continuing Debate over Science and Religion. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Lenski, R., Ofria, C., Pennock, R. T., and Adami, C. 2003. “The evolutionary origin of complex features.” Nature 423, 139–44.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Miller, K. B. (ed.) 2003. Perspectives on an Evolving Creation. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdman’s Publishing Company.Google Scholar
Miller, K. R. 1999. Finding Darwin’s God: A Scientist’s Search for Common Ground between God and Evolution. New York: Harper Collins Publishers.Google Scholar
Monton, B. 2009. Seeking God in Science: An Atheist Defends Intelligent Design. Peterborough, ON: Broadview Press.Google Scholar
National Safety Council. 2017. Injury Facts 2017. Available at: www.nsc.org/home-safety/safety-topics/choking-suffocation; https://injuryfacts.nsc.org/all-injuries/preventable-death-overview/odds-of-dying.Google Scholar
Numbers, R. L. 1998. Darwinism comes to America. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Paley, W. 1850. Natural Theology: Or Evidences of the Existence and Attributes of the Deity Collected from the Appearances of Nature. Boston, MA: Gould, Kendall, and Lincoln.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pennock, R. T. 1995. “Moral Darwinism: ethical evidence for the descent of man.” Biology & Philosophy 10, 287–307.Google Scholar
Pennock, R. T. 1996. “Naturalism, evidence and creationism: the case of Phillip Johnson.” Biology and Philosophy 11(4), 543–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pennock, R. T. 1999. Tower of Babel: The Evidence against The New Creationism. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press and Bradford Books.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pennock, R. T. 2001. Intelligent Design Creationism and Its Critics: Philosophical, Theological and Scientific Perspectives. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press and Bradford Books.Google Scholar
Pennock, R. T. 2007. “God of the gaps: the argument from ignorance and the limits of methodological naturalism,” in Petto, A. and Godfrey, L. (eds.), Scientists Confront Creationism and Intelligent Design. New York: W. W. Norton, 309–38.Google Scholar
Ruse, M. 1979. The Darwinian Revolution: Science Red in Tooth and Claw. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Ruse, M. 2001. Can a Darwinian be a Christian? The Relationship Between Science and Religion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Van Til, H. J. 1986. The Fourth Day: What the Bible and the Heavens are Telling Us about the Creation. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.Google Scholar
Further Reading
Haught, J. F. 2010. Making Sense of Evolution: Darwin, God, and the Drama of Life. Louisville, KY: John Knox Press. A Catholic theologian provides an account of how Darwinian evolution may be seen as fitting with the Church’s religious dogma.Google Scholar
Hume, D. 1779. Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion. London. A well-deserved classic discussion of arguments for and against the existence of God; Hume’s subtle philosophical presentation repays repeated readings.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, P. E. 1990. Evolution as Dogma: The Establishment of Naturalism. Dallas, TX: Haughton Publishing Company. This foundational text of the IDC movement laid out their key arguments against evolution.Google Scholar
Lebo, L. 2008. The Devil in Dover: An Insider’s Story of Dogma v. Darwin in Small-Town America. New York: The New Press. From an astute local reporter who covered the story, the best book about the Kitzmiller v. Dover IDC trial.Google Scholar
Miller, K. B. (ed.) 2003. Perspectives on an Evolving Creation. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdman’s Publishing Company. A collection of papers by evangelical Christians who argue that evolution is compatible with their belief in God.Google Scholar
Paley, W. 1850. Natural Theology: Or Evidences of the Existence and Attributes of the Deity Collected from the Appearances of Nature. Boston, MA: Gould, Kendall, and Lincoln. Paley was not the first to make the watchmaker analogy, but this is the most famous and influential articulation of the design argument from natural theology.Google Scholar
Pennock, R. T. 1999. Tower of Babel: The Evidence against The New Creationism. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press and Bradford Books. As Frederick Crews put it, this “comprehensive and consistently rational” study is “the best book opposing creationism in all of its guises.”Google Scholar
Pennock, R. T. 2001. Intelligent Design Creationism and Its Critics: Philosophical, Theological and Scientific Perspectives. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press and Bradford Books. A one-stop collection of articles for and against IDC, featuring all the major players on all sides.Google Scholar
Ruse, M. 2001. Can a Darwinian be a Christian? The Relationship Between Science and Religion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Philosopher of science Ruse provides a synoptic account of the arguments about the compatibility of Darwinian evolution with Christianity.Google Scholar