An Atheist Defends Intelligent Design

Philosopher Bradley Monton’s new book Seeking God in Science: An Atheist Defends Intelligent Design is now available.  The publisher’s website gives this description:

The doctrine of intelligent design is often the subject of acrimonious debate. Seeking God in Science cuts through the rhetoric that distorts the debates between religious and secular camps. Bradley Monton, a philosopher of science and an atheist, carefully considers the arguments for intelligent design and argues that intelligent design deserves serious consideration as a scientific theory.

Monton also gives a lucid account of the debate surrounding the inclusion of intelligent design in public schools and presents reason why students’ science education could benefit from a careful consideration of the arguments for and against it.

Douglas Groothuis provides an endorsement:

“Seeking God in Science is a refreshing and fair-minded exploration of intelligent design arguments. Unlike the many ideologically-driven detractors of intelligent design, Monton refuses to set up a straw man, poison the well, or dismiss it as unscientific. Bradley Monton writes as “a friendly atheist”—one who seriously and honestly considers claims that challenge atheism. As such, this book is a welcome breakthrough.”– Douglas Groothuis, Professor of Philosophy, Denver Seminary

Dr. Monton was the moderator of the recent Craig-Ayala debate, available to download here (MP3).


Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Bookmark and Share

5 thoughts on “An Atheist Defends Intelligent Design

  1. Well simply because radio signals with language in them can only be created by intelligence as far as we can tell whereas living things seem to evolve as far as we can tell and evolution builds up information from the interaction of random noise with the universe.

    I take it that you aren’t claiming that radio waves aren’t alive are you?



    • Hi Jesus,
      Thanks for your comment. Well, as you know, the definition of science is a contentious subject, and there isn’t a single agreed-upon definition. But, an even more important question than whether ID counts as science, is whether ID is true. If it is true, I think we’ll have to adjust our conception of science to accommodate it. If SETI scientists can infer (in principle) that an alien intelligence is communicating through a certain pattern of radio waves in space, why can’t we infer that specified, complex biological systems also require intelligence?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s