Home » Intelligent Design » Bradley Monton: Atheist argues that design is serious scientific theory

Bradley Monton: Atheist argues that design is serious scientific theory

Apparently, atheist Bradley Monton has just published a book with Broadview Press:

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.

I sure hope Monton has tenure. Otherwise, he could end up driving truck for a living.

Not that there is anything wrong with that. I once considered it myself, because they really needed stable middle-aged women with small hands to get under the trailer and do some of the fine hitch work – but I knew I didn’t have the muscle power. (If you must stomp on a can opener to get it through the lid, you do not have the muscle power for industry. Better stick to freelance journalism, if anyone taught you the trade.)

  • Delicious
  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • RSS Feed

10 Responses to Bradley Monton: Atheist argues that design is serious scientific theory

  1. Better get prepared now for the numerous one-star reviews and comments from the atheist faithful at Amazon.

  2. What’s wrong with driving a truck?

  3. 3
    CannuckianYankee

    Barb,

    I’ve been reading Amazon.com recently – particularly reviews of some recent ID books, and most of the reviews are quite positive. Most of the 1 star reviews are non-substantive rants against ID, which glaringly show the reviewers to have not read the book. I’ll have to look up this book and see what they say.

  4. I’m confused. Why call it Seeking God in Science if he is an atheist. Why not just call it Seeking Design in Science? Is this the triumph of marketing?

  5. Hi Denyse,

    Bradley Monton also has a link on his blog page to an interesting article, which he describes as follows:

    Mark Sharlow has written a solid paper critiquing Dawkins’ argument from complexity against the existence of God — the core argument in Dawkins’ book The God Delusion. The paper is called Playing Fast and Loose with Complexity: A Critique of Dawkins’ Atheistic Argument from Improbability. It’s not mind-blowing philosophy, but I think it does a nice job explaining some of what’s wrong with Dawkins’ argument.

    (And just to make clear, one can reject Dawkins’ argument for atheism while still being an atheist.)

    I’ve just had a look at the article. It’s extremely accessible, and in my opinion, it does a good job of demolishing Dawkins’ case.

  6. CannuckianYankee: I was referring to the tags placed on some ID material (you’ll see ‘breathtaking inanity’ used more than once) as well as the stars. Generally, atheists rate the book one star but don’t bother reading it; I’ve seen this with other religious books as well.

    Oh, and beware the communities. The Religion community has angry, shrieking atheists who go absolutely insane if you state that you’re a practioner of any sort of faith.

  7. 7
    CannuckianYankee

    Barb,

    Yes, I’ve seen these tags too. Oh the excitement of applying the use of a new word in one’s vocabulary! It seems that many atheists all hang out at the same communities, where these mantras are invented.

    I used to post on the AOL religion groups. I’m used to all the attacks. Actually though, I met some atheists who were quite warm and friendly even though we disagreed. Of course back in those days there wasn’t much talk about intelligent design.

    But for the most part, aganda-driven atheists will attack even their own kind if they side with an opposing POV. I expect that Mr. Monton will be mercilessly opposed. Look what happened to Antony Flew when PZ Meyers and his ilk got a hold of him.

    David Stove is another atheist who wrote an amusing and insightful attack on Darwinism. I’m not certain what kind of reception he got for Darwinian Fairytales.

  8. Oh, he must have tenure. Professor Monton has been “out” as far as his position on ID for some time. His CU webpage for years now has explained his position. I am in the Boulder area, a CU alum, and follow the university closely in the news and there has not been a hint of a public outcry. And public outcry about University matters is the town pastime here. Only the protection of tenure could explain the status quo.

  9. The publisher asked me to endorse Monton’s book. Here’s what I wrote:

    “Brad Monton has done the intellectual community an enormous service in writing this defense of intelligent design (or ID). As an atheist, he defends ID not because he thinks it is true. Rather, he shows how it raises important questions and how many critics, in their enthusiasm to kill the baby in the cradle, are short-circuiting a discussion that needs to happen. Monton understands that important questions are never resolved by ignoring or marginalizing them. By employing his considerable skills as an analytic philosopher, he brings clarity to this much controverted question of intelligent design.”
    –William A. Dembski, author of THE END OF CHRISTIANITY

  10. Oh, he must have tenure.

    The description of the book says Monton is Associate Professor of Philosophy at UC Boulder. From what I read, Associate Professor is a tenured position.

Leave a Reply