THE CREATION HYPOTHESIS:  SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE FOR AN INTELLIGENT
DESIGNER.   J. P. Moreland, Editor.  Intervarsity Press.  1994.  293 pages
of text; 38 pages of endnotes.
 
Reviewed by James P. Hurd; Bethel College; St. Paul, MN  55112.  Email:
hurd@bethel.edu.
Submitted: Mon, 10 Oct 1994 15:27:17 -0600 (CST)
 
ABSTRACT  This is a book about origins.  Its thesis is that
intelligent design, rather than an evolutionary hypothesis of descent,
better explains empirical evidence in four areas:  origin of the universe,
origin of life and living information, origin of major taxonomic groups,
and origin of human linguistic capabilities.  The editor, J. P. Moreland,
is presently professor of philosophy at Talbot School of Theology, Biola
University.  Contributors to the volume hold Ph.D.'s in mathematics,
philosophy, materials science, linguistics, biophysics, astronomy, and
paleontology.  This book is a must for anyone who wishes to develop a
context for, and a critique of, evolutionary theory. The authors powerfully
discuss the foundations and presuppositions of philosophical and
methodological naturalism.  The book clearly argues the limitations of the
scientific method, and also the inadequacies of methodological naturalism
in addressing questions of origins.  The book is much stronger in cogently
critiquing macroevolutionary theory than it is in building a case for what
the authors call "theistic science  (the  scientific  idea of a
Personal Designer).  The authors make a strong case for evidence, or the
possibility of evidence, of  design in the natural world.  However,
I believe the book fails in its argument for a "theistic
science."
--------------------------------
 
This is a book about origins.  Its thesis is that intelligent design,
rather than an evolutionary hypothesis of descent, better explains evidence
in four areas:  origin of the universe, origin of life and living
information, origin of major taxonomic groups, and origin of human
linguistic capabilities. "A major theme is that certain scientific factors
(such as the origin and fine-tuning of the universe, the origin of life and
information systems, the origin of major taxonomic groups, and the origin
of human language and linguistic abilities) help to confirm the kalam
cosmological argument and the design argument for God's existence" (p. 33).
 
The editor, J. P. Moreland, has a Ph.D. in philosophy from the University
of Southern California and is presently professor of philosophy at Talbot
School of Theology, Biola University.  Contributors to the volume hold
Ph.D.'s in mathematics, philosophy, materials science, linguistics,
biophysics, astronomy, and paleontology.
 
In Chapter 1, Moreland challenges the assertion that science must
presuppose methodological naturalism, and argues for a "theistic science"
(that is, the idea of a personal designer).  In Chapter 2, Stephen Meyer
develops the argument that the notion of intelligent design is within the
legitimate scope of science.  In Chapter 3, Bill Dembski uses a "thought
experiment" to show that it is possible in principle to infer supernatural
design from an examination of empirical evidence from the natural world.
In Chapter 4, Hugh Ross examines various astronomical facts that bear on
the origin of the universe and uses them to assess the theory that the
universe shows intelligent design and a designer.  He cites evidence that
the universe had a beginning and is fine-tuned for the support of life
forms.  In Chapter 5, Walter Bradley and Charles Thaxton distinguish
between the origin of biological organisms and the biological information
that codes for these organisms.  They argue that this biological "language"
could not have developed from purely natural forces, and that it is
evidence for an intelligent designer.  In Chapter 6, Kurt Wise analyzes the
origin of life's major groups.  He argues that three pieces of taxonomic
analysis support the Designer hypothesis more than they do the
macroevolutionary hypothesis of descent:  the degree and nature of the
complexity of life, the integration of different levels of complexity, and
the aesthetic nature of living things.  This discussion of paleontology and
taxonomy is relevant to a consideration of hominid taxa, although
anthropologists will be disappointed that fossil hominids and human origins
are not more adequately discussed.  In chapter 7, John Oller and John
Omdahl argue that language capacity is unique to human beings and that
this capacity presupposes an innate design.  An appendix (John Ankerberg
and John Weldon) catalogs the large number of prominent scientists
who declare that evolutionary theory is in a period of crisis.
 
The book is much stronger in cogently critiquing macroevolutionary theory
than it is in building a case for what the authors call "theistic science.
The authors seem to argue two somewhat contradictory points.  First, they
state that we must go BEYOND the scientific method to understand the
empirical world and its origins.  But, second, they insist that we place
"theistic science" WITHIN our scientific endeavors.  I see here mainly a
linguistic and taxonomic question that can be resolved by a "division of
labor."  We should restrict our scientific methodology to methodological
naturalism.  If we admit a "theistic science," how could atheists and
Hindus participate in science?  However, we must recognize the limitations
of science in its capacity for explanation, especially ultimate
explanations and explanation of purpose. These considerations of ultimate
cause and meaning should be reserved for philosophy and theology.
 
This book is a must for anyone who wishes to develop a context for, and a
critique of, evolutionary theory.  It is not a simple potshot fired at
evolutionary theory.  It is clearly written, the chapters are closely
integrated and focused on the central question, and the arguments confront
the latest and best thinking in evolutionary biology.  The book is a
powerful exposition of the foundations and presuppositions of philosophical
and methodological naturalism.  The book clearly argues the limitations of
the scientific method, and also the inadequacies of methodological
naturalism in addressing questions of origins.
 
The book is successful in its critique of evolutionary theory.  It makes a
strong case for evidence, or the possibility of evidence, of  design in the
natural world.  However, I believe it fails in its argument for a "theistic
science."
   ----------------------------------------------------