Book Description
Phillip E. Johnson offers a reasoned and scientifically sound evaluation of the support for Darwinism--from fossil records to molecular biology.
Customer Reviews:
Naturalistic Evolution - a fundamentalist religion - natural select breakdown - fossil problem.......2007-09-28
The case against evolution examines the logical errors in the theory. Evidence does not create law. There are man made laws and there are divine laws. Divine laws can only be discovered and not created. 1 Cor 15:38-39 38. "But God giveth it a body as it hath pleased him, and to every seed his own body". 39. "All flesh is not the same flesh: but there is one kind of flesh of men, another of beasts, another of fishes, and another of birds". All life has a spiritual pattern. Each life form operates within a sphere of glory and intelligence. A flower does not evolve into an elephant. Breeders can produce specific traits in offspring. However, no new species have been breed that can survive outside their original sphere. The resurrection is proof that evolution is false. Christ was the first fruits to overcome death and receive a glorified and exalted body of glory. It is impossible for a lesser sphere to evolve into a greater sphere of glory. D&C 130:22-23. 22. The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man's; the Son also; but the Holy Ghost has not a body of flesh and bones, but is a personage of spirit. Were it not so, the Holy Ghost could not dwell in us." 23. "A man may receive the Holy Ghost, and it may descend upon him and not tarry with him." Life came from older sphere and was brought to earth during the creation. Life did not evolve. The earth was organized from existing matter. Scientist claim the cosmos may be 12 billion years old and the elements the product of super nova stars. The elements are eternal and the elements can neither be created nor destroyed. Jesus Christ was the creator of many worlds. D&C 76:24. "That by him, and through him, and of him, the worlds are and were created, and the inhabitants thereof are begotten sons and daughters of God." A spiritual transformation must be in place affecting life forms before Christ's second coming to withstand his glory. Evolution can't and will not address what would happen in the presence of a being of glory. Evolution must maintain a narrow scope for its explanations. Evolutionary explanations must be incremental and malleable enough to predict small naturalistic changes resulting over millions of years. Any cataclysmic change can't be predicted or explained and should be avoid. Naturalistic evolution is a political, economic, and social tool. Evolution destroys morality and does not acknowledge Christ's resurrection and atonement. Evolution does not answer the question, "What is the purpose of life?" Evolution doctrines can't be falsified until a substitute theory is in place as a working solution. Evolution can't explore the non- verifiable data nor can it explore all the possibilities. Evolution can't prove entropy. Evolution is improvable because it is incomplete. D&C 101:24 "And every corruptible thing, both of man, or of the beast of the field, or the fowls of the heavens, or of the fish of the sea, that dwells upon the all the face of the earth, shall be consumed." Adam was the first man on the earth. All major civilizations start after the flood. Prehistoric man has limited about of physical evidence and could fit all on one table. Evolutionist have created a fantastic fantasy about the origins of man, yet are unable to demonstrate the common ancestor from which man came. Adam was created in the image of God and not ape. "Evolution in the Darwinist usage implies a completely naturalistic metaphysical system, in which matter evolved to its present state of organized complexity without any participation by a creator." Darwin conclusion that "mutability" provided the mechanism for all life is parasitic. Evolution can't create higher life forms. Mechanized evolution has not demonstrated life. Evolution accommodates to make the theory fit fossil evidences.
Evolution is a hypothesis a not a fact. "Scientist were believed to formulate theories in order to explain pre-existing experimental data, and to verify their theories by accumulating additional supporting evidence. " "In scientific practice the theory normally precedes the experiment or fact finding process rather than the other way around." A problem or question must be posed for discovery and explanation." Evolution insists on Logic positivism demanding verifiability. Evolution scientists are fanatics, desperate not to be wrong, and look for the breakthrough fact that will vindicate them. Popper believed that science began with an imaginative or even mythological conjecture about the world. Evolution is a fundamentalist religion. "Whenever science is enlisted in some other cause - religious, political, or racialistic - the result is always that the scientist themselves become fanatics."
The fossil problem is that the fossil records do not prove gradual change. The history of fossils suggests 1. "Most species exhibit no directional change during their tenure on earth. They appear in the fossil record looking pretty much the same as when they disappear; morphological change is usually limited and directionless." 2. "Sudden appearance. In any local area, a species does not arise gradually by the steady transformation of its ancestors; it appears all at once and fully formed." Therefore, one can conclude the theory of natural selection is not a fact, as an explanation of species origination and morphological directions.
Engaging read!.......2007-09-27
This is a great book and should be required reading for those studying Darwinism in school.
Christian Biologist says Oversimplified.......2007-06-19
This book is preaching to the choir... and oh, by the way, I'm in the choir, as a Christian... but the biologist in me found this much too simplistic. Of course, I've studied evolution at the graduate level and Mr. Johnson's background is in law. Johnson makes some good points, but doesn't have a full-orbed understanding of the theoretical underpinnings of evolution. This book doesn't really help or hurt the case for God.
3 1/2 stars - Mostly Uninspiring........2007-05-24
To begin with, as other readers have said, this book does show it's age. Having read many interesting books discussing both sides of evolution recently, this fell a bit flat for me for one reason.
In the first few pages of the book, the author takes the time to inform the reader of his personal beliefs and religious background. He goes on to say that he is not arguing in favor of Intelligent Design but merely examining and questioning the various aspects of "Darwinism". The problem arises when the author builds a case for his point, a case that is well executed and insightful, and then leans on the crutch of a "Creator". To me, that smacks of ID and refutes one of the few positive things I might have taken from a book of this nature.
NOT A RELIGIOUS FUNDAMENTALIST ... JUST ASKING.......2007-05-10
I admit it - I've always thought some aspects of the whole evolution idea didn't seem to hang together. Phillip E. Johnson questions all of it in this book, which obviously has been controversial. But why not look at all the claims of evolution and ask for the proof? Does everyone who questions whether one species can really turn into another, or who doesn't believe life began by chance in some primordial slime have to be labeled a "creation science" religious nut?
Johnson says the fossil record does not support the "transitional" species that should have been found by now. Others say the fossil record does provide examples of these. Hard for us non-scientists to sort that one out. Johnson raises the issue of macro-evolution vs. micro-evolution. Can a new species appear sudenly, or are changes made very slowly over the centuries, in line with the uniformitarianism thinking of Darwin's day? Johnson does not think tiny changes over time can really account for the changes in the animals on earth going back to the beginning, as demonstrated through the fossil record.
I was disappointed that Johnson says nothing at all about the most controversial species change - that of human beings. In the infamous Scopes "monkey trial," the main bone of contention was the idea that man and monkey were relatives who both descended from a common ancestor. How and when did human become human and not simian? When I was a kid, we used to make jokes about "the missing link." No one talks about the missing link anymore, but if I'm not mistaken, no transitional creature between human and our common ancestor with other primates has been found.
I think the strongest part of this book is Johnson's contention that science has become a religion for many who buy into the total evolution theory. Science is supposed to be about testable hypotheses, but evolution is argued mainly from logic. We cannot travel back millions of years to see if chemicals coming together in some swamp became alive. We cannot watch the process of a dinosaur turning into a bird, even though the fictional Paleontologist in Jurassic Park believed the one species was the ancestor of the other.
It is obvious that some scientists are so wedded to their atheism that they start with the concept that all life is accidental, without purpose, the result of natural selection. Clearly, the concept of natural selection works within one species (animals that change color to match their environment and conceal themselves form predators, for instance), but Johnson rightly asks how one species becomes another. It's not ok to ask a dedicated evolutionist: What if you are wrong? But it is ok for them to ridicule any suggestion that there is a purpose behind the universe, that life is more than a chemical reaction, and humans are more than relatives of apes. Strict evolutionists cannot prove their claims, yet maintain that it's all true. Evolution does make some sense, and does have some evidence to support it, but absolute proof is not obtainable. Evolution is a theory, not a religion.
And speaking of religion, fundamentalists are entitled to have their say, but should not promote "creation science" (which is no science at all). I DO want to see children learn about Darwin and his ideas about evolution, which have been so influential, but I also want to have future generations that ask questions, think for themselves, and ask for proof about anything they are told they must believe. Johnson may be wrong in much of his criticism, but I applaud him for making a rational case against insistence that evolution, like any religious belief that is without proof, is a fact.
Amazon.com
If you haven't seen the film version of Inherit the Wind, you might have read it in high school. And even people who have never heard of either the movie or the play probably know something about the events that inspired them: The 1925 Scopes "monkey trial," during which Darwin's theory of evolution was essentially put on trial before the nation. Inherit the Wind paints a romantic picture of John Scopes as a principled biology teacher driven to present scientific theory to his students, even in the teeth of a Tennessee state law prohibiting the teaching of anything other than creationism. The truth, it turns out, was something quite different. In his fascinating history of the Scopes trial, Summer for the Gods, Edward J. Larson makes it abundantly clear that Truth and the Purity of Science had very little to do with the Scopes case. Tennessee had passed a law prohibiting the teaching of evolution, and the American Civil Liberties Union responded by advertising statewide for a high-school teacher willing to defy the law. Communities all across Tennessee saw an opportunity to put themselves on the map by hosting such a controversial trial, but it was the town of Dayton that came up with a sacrificial victim: John Scopes, a man who knew little about evolution and wasn't even the class's regular teacher. Chosen by the city fathers, Scopes obligingly broke the law and was carted off to jail to await trial.
What happened next was a bizarre mix of theatrics and law, enacted by William Jennings Bryan for the prosecution and Clarence Darrow for the defense. Though Darrow lost the trial, he made his point--and his career--by calling Bryan, a noted Bible expert, as a witness for the defense. Summer for the Gods is a remarkable retelling of the trial and the events leading up to it, proof positive that truth is stranger than science.
Book Description
Reissued with a new preface: the Pulitzer Prize-winning book that is "quite simply the best book ever written on the Scopes Trial and its place in American history and myth."
In the summer of 1925, the sleepy hamlet of Dayton, Tennessee, became the setting for one of the 20th century's most contentious dramas: the Scopes trial that pit William Jennings Bryan and the anti-Darwinists against a teacher named John Scopes into a famous debate over science, religion, and their place in public education.
That trial marked the start of a battle that continues to this day--in Dover, Pennsylvania, Kansas, Cobb County, Georgia, and many other cities and states throughout the country. Edward Larson's classic, Summer for the Gods, received the Pulitzer Prize in History in 1998 and is the single most authoritative account of a pivotal event whose combatants remain at odds in school districts and courtrooms. For this edition, Larson has added a new preface that assesses the state of the battle between creationism and evolution, and points the way to how it might potentially be resolved.
Customer Reviews:
De-simplification.......2007-08-21
A Tennessee newspaper called the Scopes trial at the time a 'publicity stunt'. Meaning publicity for the city of Dayton.
America never ceases to surprise me. Until not so long ago I had never heard of the Scopes trial. I stumbled over it once in a while when reading about the disputes between Christian fundamentalists and 'science', specifically evolutionists. I imagined something like a fight of the titans, Evolution versus Creation.
Not so. Now I learn from Larson that everything was a little different. (This is by now also a cliche: things are not what they seem. Are they ever?)
Actually it had aspects of a farce.
The more interesting aspects are not the farcical ones though, but rather how this event was the focal point not so much of two strong opponents clashing, but of a much more diverse field of issues.
I had forgotten that evolution, by the mid 20s, was a different thing from what it seems now. First of all, the so-called Darwinian synthesis had not yet happened, which led to 'neo-Darwinism', basing Darwin's theory of natural selection on knowledge of genetics (of which Darwin himself had had no idea yet).
In the 20s, Darwinism was much more attached to the smelly and dead ideology of so-called Social Darwinism (for which Mr.Darwin should not be blamed), than it is nowadays. At that time, eugenics were still considered an honorable pursuit, it appears. That was the attempt to improve mankind's genetic substance by a kind of human breeding program. Going for Nietzsche's Uebermensch. Now we know how it ended with the Nazis' euthanasia programs. Even World War I, which had been over not so long past, had brought implications of 'Darwinism' in the ideology of Wilhelminian militarism. Overall a rather dubious surrounding and not as squeaky clean as pure science.
At the same time there was the aftermath of the social earthquakes that WWI had shaken loose: the Russian revolution, the spreading hysteria in America about the 'Red Scare', labor prosecution, leading to McCarthyism later on. And among the Christian denominations the fight between the modernists and the fundamentalists, whose primary opponent seems to have been their deviating fellow Christians more than the evolutionists, who became sort of a derived target.
The trial itself is a ridiculous affair about a substitute teacher who used a book which mentions evolution, which broke a newly introduced law against teaching evolution in Tennessee. What a joke. Particularly as the teacher volunteered to be the defendant in this mock trial.
The book also de-simplifies the aftermath by showing how the real events were mystified in later texts, and by showing how fundamentalism, rather than accepting defeat, just moved away from the general public into an own strong subculture.
The Facts, yes--but still more Drama than Debate.......2007-08-15
In order to be credible to all sides in a highly-partisan cultural war, professor of law and history Edward J. Larson in his book "Summer of the Gods: The Scopes Trial And America's Continuing Debate Over Science and Religion" had to present the facts and nothing but the facts ("so help him God" or not). This is the book's necessary strength and its unfortunate weakness. I would like to have heard more reflection.
Much light could come just from placing the historical scene in a larger context. For example, what connections can be made between the meaninglessness and despair of World War I, the recent Marxist-Leninist revolution, the red scare of the 20's, Darrow's agnosticism and membership in the Communist party, and the fears of an attack on traditional values and beliefs this all must have engendered?
The facts about this "great," or at least highly significant, all-American trial are so often the exactly opposite of the myths that survived so long! Perhaps we now need a anthropologist of culture and religion to analyze how we could go so long believing utter falsehoods, and all without force of propaganda or threat of gulag.
Surely on the deeper issues of the philosophical debate between science and religion as reflected in American culture, Mr. Larson, whose background is exactly in this type of historical study, could lend a hand. Certainly he has done us a great service by his meticulously objective work for this well-deserved Pulitzer Prize winning effort, but there is little philosophical thought to be found.
The Scopes courtroom led to more drama than debate, more chance than justice or toleration. Both sides claimed to win, but all sides actually lost. Both the real trial and the mythic one reflected in the movie "Inherit the Wind" (and other cultural renderings passed down as folklore)--both failed to even satisfactorily debate let alone struggle with the underlying conflicts or seek answers to America's larger quest for clarity of identity.
Neither built toward a consensus. Hence our ongoing crazy cultural wars with Ten Commandments tablets allowed here but not there, all supported by highly reasoned legal arguments on both sides that will all look more like myth and superstition to the next eon--hopefully. Our capitalistic Mark Twainish show trial was mercifully free of the menace of Stalin's show trials of the 30's. Nevertheless, by failing to address the challenges of this chapter in our over-politicized mythic struggle, we neither evolve nor practice true religion.
Nevertheless, as a starting touchstone "Summer of the God's" deserves a place on all our book shelves. It has inspired me to want to read a biography about William Jennings Bryan, and Darrow's autobiography as well.
Great coverage of the trial; of its aftermath, not so much..........2007-07-05
The author did a great job of demystifying the trial, a task long overdue. The question was whether a state or community could prohibit teaching any theory or doctrine in the public classroom, and jury had decided that it could. If young Scopes was teaching Marx's theory of class struggle in history class, I think the outcome would have been the same, though I doubt there would have been even a fictionalized account opening on Broadway, thirty years later.
Yet somehow, because the theory in question was Darwinism, and because the trial was held in the Bible Belt, it has been misrepresented from the get-go as another icon in the ever continuing "...debate over science and religion." Unfortunately, this is the subtitle of this work, and the reason at least one star was dropped from my rating.
The author continued to equate "anti-evolutionists" with "Fundamentalists" throughout his book, which extended into the last decades of the 20th Century, long after the equation was valid. By this time, several scientists, many without any strong religious beliefs, had poked serious holes in Evolutionary theory, developing a formalized concept called "Intelligent Design." Furthermore, several other scientists, though not willing to dispute macro-evolution overall, had serious reservations about supporting Darwin's Natural Selection mechanism for the development of new species. Thus, Punctuated Equilibrium appeared on the scene, championed by the late Harvard paleontologist, Dr. Stephen Jay Gould, which weakened the theory most often taught in school, and understood by the public, even more.
Unfortunately, the author decided not to include these scientific controversies, perhaps not wanting to "dirty up the water."
But in doing so, he chose to represent the ongoing reluctance of some state and local school boards, some far from the Bible Belt, to teach Darwinism as anything more than a theory, as purely a product of "Fundamentalism."
He probably should have stopped his narrative about a chapter earlier...
The Echoes of the Past .......2007-05-28
Summer for the Gods
The echoes of the past continue to reverberate. Although it's been eighty years since the Scopes Trial, the debate over the teaching of the origins of life goes on.
The monumental intellectual battle pitted Williams Jennings Bryan against Clarence Darrow following the indictment and arrest of a Dayton, Tennessee public school teacher for violating a state law forbidding the teaching of evolution.
The controversy focused attention...not much of it favorable... on the South, which was still smarting from the Civil War and Reconstruction.
In "Summer for the Gods: The Scopes Trial and America's continuing Debate over Science " Edward J. Larson takes the reader through the background of the Scopes matter; the involvement of the ACLU, which was seeking a test case at the time; and the role of the Prosecution and Defense. The media (or, the Press at the time) had an important role as well -- the Baltimore Sun's acerbic H.L. Mencken covered the story, and on one day of the trial journalists filed 200,000 words by telegraph. Larson's Pulitzer-prize winning account is an enjoyable and entertaining read. His "afterword," which compares the Scopes matter to the current debate between Science and "Intelligent Design", is especially useful. The recent attempts to restrict academic freedom in Kansas and other jurisdictions illustrate the currency of the debate.
A recent Google search revealed 29,600,000 hits for "intelligent design." There are societies, institutions, and now even a Museum designed to promote Creationism. (Interestingly, William Jennings Bryan founded his own college, Bryan College, to promote his views, much as the late Rev Jerry Fallwell.)
Larson makes ample use of the papers of Bryan, Darrow and other principals in the trial and contemporary news accounts. His book is an entertaining, enlightening, and gracefully-written addition to the literature on the subject.
As another reviewer has noted, the legal background of the story is of particular interest... particularly given than in 1925, many general principles which we take for granted today (for example, the application of the Establishment of Religion Clause to State as well as Federal law ) didn't exist at the time.
Pulitzer-prize winning book.......2007-04-30
It's easy to see why Edward Larson won a Pulitzer prize for this book. It's a fascinating, well-written account of the Scopes trial that avoids the hyper-partisanship that usually surrounds the issue.
Larson doesn't come across as an obnoxious evolutionist or an obnoxious creationist. Instead he comes across as a truly professional historian who gives a thorough and fair account of this famous trial.
Average customer rating:
- A Declaration of War
- Fascinating Trial; Mediocre Account
- 21St CENTURY SCOPES TRIAL: DARWIN: 40 INTELLIGENT DESIGN: 0 (ID STRIKES OUT)
- Don't Judge This Book By Its Cover
- Like a box of chocolates: tasty, and with lots of nuts
|
40 Days and 40 Nights: Darwin, Intelligent Design, God, OxyContin®, and Other Oddities on Trial in Pennsylvania
Matthew Chapman
Manufacturer: Collins
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover
 General
| United States
| Americas
| History
| Subjects
| Books
Pennsylvania
| State & Local
| United States
| Americas
| History
| Subjects
| Books
Mid-Atlantic
| State & Local
| United States
| Americas
| History
| Subjects
| Books
Educational Law & Legislation
| Specialties
| Law
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Social Sciences
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
Evolution
| Anthropology
| Social Sciences
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
History
| Education Theory
| Education
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
Curricula
| Education
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
Science & Religion
| Religious Studies
| Religion & Spirituality
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Evolution
| Professional Science
| Professional & Technical
| Subjects
| Books
Educational Law & Legislation
| Specialties
| Law
| Professional & Technical
| Subjects
| Books
Look Inside History Books
| Trip
| Specialty Stores
| Books
Look Inside Nonfiction Books
| Trip
| Specialty Stores
| Books
Look Inside Religion & Spirituality Books
| Trip
| Specialty Stores
| Books
Similar Items:
-
Monkey Girl: Evolution, Education, Religion, and the Battle for America's Soul
-
The Battle Over the Meaning of Everything: Evolution, Intelligent Design, and a School Board in Dover, PA
-
God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything
-
Not in Our Classrooms: Why Intelligent Design Is Wrong for Our Schools
-
Scientists Confront Intelligent Design and Creationism
ASIN: 0061179450
Release Date: 2007-04-10 |
Book Description
In this fascinating story of evolution, religion, politics, and personalities, Matthew Chapman captures the story behind the headlines in the debate over God and science in America
In Kitzmiller v. Dover Board of Education, decided in late 2005, a Republican judge rendered a surprising verdict in a case that pitted the teaching of intelligent design (sometimes known as "creationism in a lab coat") against the teaching of evolution. Taking place in a small Pennsylvania school district, the case had national repercussions, all the way up to President Bush, who said he believed intelligent design should be taught as "an alternative theory" to evolution.
Matthew Chapman, the great-great-grandson of Charles Darwin, spent several months covering the trial from beginning to end. Through his in-depth encounters with the participants—creationists, preachers, teachers, scientists on both sides of the issue, lawyers, theologians, the judge, and the eleven parents who resisted the fundamentalist proponents of intelligent design—Chapman tells a sometimes terrifying, often hilarious, and above all moving story of ordinary people doing battle in America over the place of religion and science in modern life.
Written with a filmaker's eye for character and detail, and including insights only a descendent of Darwin could bring forth, Chapman paints an entertaining, yet disturbing picture of America today.
Customer Reviews:
A Declaration of War.......2007-08-28
I like to think of Forty Days and Forty Nights as the first salvo of a battle to take our country back from the evangelicals who have intimidated our elected officials into ritualistic declarations of faith and foolish legislation. Matthew Chapman tells how ordinary people in a small Pennsylvania town stood up courageously to the faithbound who tried to insert their brand of religious creationism into public education. These ordinary citizens risked their reputations and in some cases their livelihoods to preserve the constitutional wall between Church and State. By following the citizens' litigation opposing the local school board's purchase for use in classroom biology of a textbook espousing "intelligent design" as an alternative to the teaching of evolution, Chapman uses the recorded testimony of the combatants to expose the "inanity" (the judge's final word) of the school board's case. The lesson is clear: only such fearless opposition can break the hold which the evangelicals have gained in our country over public policy.
Fascinating Trial; Mediocre Account.......2007-08-06
Chapman's account of the issues and personalities that shaped the famed Kitzmiller v. Dover case in Pennsylvania is a truly entertaining read. There's so much great material here that one can't help but be fascinated by the trial transcripts, interviews, and examples of Intelligent Design (ID) "literature" that Chapman includes here.
In particular, Chapman does a fine job of illustrating the contrasting personalities that made up the school board which introduced ID to Dover-area public schools. Without editorializing too much, Chapman shows how the board did the public a disservice by letting their religious views blind their commitment to the education of an increasingly lethargic student body. It's sad to hear how Dover-area kids were let down by a cohort of fundamentalists who, as the trial proceedings demonstrate, actually had very little to no knowledge of what constitutes evolution and what constitutes ID (much less what the scientific method is all about). So as the board was busy legislating religion in Dover, students were tuning out amidst a crumbling school infrastructure and an uninspiring curriculum. That's the most unfortunate aspect of this tale.
For me, the problem with this book is simple: there's so much great material to work with here, but Chapman is a mediocre storyteller at best. There are long sections of the book where he quotes from transcripts or interviews without any narrative insight. He describes at least six or seven of the trial participants as "good-looking." His tone alternates between flippant and cavalier -- rarely sensitive to detail and nuance. His account of the trial's finale is reduced to saying, "You've heard this before, so I'll only quote this part of X's closing statement..." And the conclusion to his narrative, "Revelation," puts forth a bizarre rant that attempts to link the rise of religious fundamentalism in America with the demise of the so-called Protestant work ethic.
I wish Chapman had engaged the trial -- the issues and the personalities -- with more tact and intelligence. This is a fun read, but it's too much "wink wink, nudge nudge" and not enough well-rounded description and analysis. For a far better account of this trial, see Margaret Talbot's article in The New Yorker, which appeared just after the trial's completion.
21St CENTURY SCOPES TRIAL: DARWIN: 40 INTELLIGENT DESIGN: 0 (ID STRIKES OUT) .......2007-07-31
Not since early Hunter S. Thompson or Tom Wolfe have I had as much fun reading a witty, provocative piece of journalistic writing as I've had in screenwriter Matthew Chapman's "40 Days and 40 Nights: Darwin, Intelligent Design, GOD, OxyContin AND OTHER Oddities ON TRIAL IN Pennsylvania". It's an enthralling, often humorous tome, that owes more to the mordant humor of Frank McCourt, in his bestselling memoirs "Angela's Ashes" and "Teacher Man", than it does to the rather dry, but never dull, prose of Chapman's great-great-grandfather, Charles Darwin, in his scientific classic, "Origin of Species". In the fall of 2005, Chapman attended the Kitzmiller vs. Dover Area School District Trial, as an accredited journalist and filmmaker, intent on making a documentary film on the trial, the town and its people. However, this would soon become a personal trek of self-reflection and discovery, in which he would make a most remarkable conclusion on the teaching of creationism in science classrooms. A trek which took him back to Dover, PA often, holding substantive conversations with the key players on both sides of the issue. And while Chapman truly strives for a cinematic narrative, fading in and out between brief discussions of the 20th Century Scopes Trial, the Discovery Institute, and his illustrious ancestor's revolutionary scientific research, the book's emphasis remains focused upon himself and his conversations with the people of Dover. So those in search of an extensive, truly profound, overview of the trial's origins and history might be best served elsewhere, most notably by reading Edward Humes' definitive, well-written account of the trial in his book "Monkey Girl: Evolution, Education, Religion, and the Battle for America's Soul", but they would miss much of the personal drama that Chapman has vividly recorded, using his prose as though it was his video camera lens, exquisitely recording all of the detail present.
Chapman's narrative is more linear in focus than Humes' comprehensive account, and adheres more closely to a chronological perspective. One that starts with the Dover Area School District board's decision in the fall of 2004 to teach Intelligent Design alongside evolution, unexpectedly starting a civil war within the town itself, led by the ardent Fundamentalist Christians on the board, against those in the Dover community who were appalled by the board's decision. Among the most sympathetic figures is unexpectedly the board's firebrand, Bill Buckingham, who ruefully admits to Chapman that he's addicted to the painkiller OxyContin, and blames it, not himself, for some of his most outlandish comments, at the board's meetings, that were reported accurately by the local press. Chapman's truly moving, poignant portrayal of him strongly hints that he is, indeed, a lost soul afflicted by drug addiction. It is through moving portraits like those of Buckingham, and his arch-nemesis, former board member Barrie Callahan, that we get a strong sense of the political and religious strife which embroiled the people of Dover for more than a year, beginning in the summer of 2004, when the board left the Dover High School science teachers twisting in the wind, simply because Buckingham had objected to the teaching of "Darwinism" - and that mentioned only briefly - in the newest edition of a popular high school textbook co-authored by Brown University cell biologist Kenneth R. Miller, who, himself, is the subject of a sympathetic portrayal by Chapman in which he explains the rationale for science's faithful adherence against "dealing with issues of meaning or purpose" during his court testimony.
However, it isn't Kenneth R. Miller who emerges as the hero of Chapman's vividly told tale. Instead, the honors rest upon the attorneys for the plaintiffs, most notably, lead attorney Eric Rothschild, and, quite unexpectedly, philosopher of science Barbara Forrest. Rothschild is depicted as a most congenial, yet still quite, astute, legal warrior in the courtroom, who is able to pry gently from leading Intelligent Design advocate - and star defense witness - Lehigh University biochemist Michael Behe a surprising admission that astrology could be viewed as scientific, based on Behe's own broad definition of what science is, one that includes the potential study of supernatural phenomena; a definition which runs counter to the one subscribed to by the National Academy of Sciences and mainstream science: a rational enterprise that is completely divorced from the supernatural realm (During this memorable "duel" of a cross-examination between Rothschild and Behe, Chapman observes Behe "smiling defiantly" as Rothschild reads the infamous disclaimer posted on the website of Lehigh University biological sciences department acknowledging evolution's scientific validity, but noting too Behe's academic freedom to pursue "research" on Intelligent Design. He draws the conclusion that Behe feels intense pain from this rejection by his own departmental colleagues.). Chapman demonstrates why philosopher Barbara Forrest may have been the plaintiffs' most effective witness. Led on by attorney Rothschild, she begins her testimony with an elegant overview of the history of the creationism, especially during the last two decades of the 20th Century, emphasizing the origins and early history of the "Intelligent Design" movement. And then she reveals the pivotal "smoking gun" in an accurate, yet dramatic fashion, documenting the text changes made in the early drafts of the Intelligent Design textbook "Of Pandas and People", noting the ample instances in which "creation" was substituted with "design", not scores of times, but at least more than one hundred different instances in the text itself. Later, she ends her testimony in a memorably tedious cross-examination by lead defense attorney Richard Thompson that drags on for nearly a day and a half.
Chapman concludes "40 Days and 40 Nights" on a most idiosyncratic, personal note, and one that he has alluded to ever since the very first page of his memoir. He contends that we should allow creationism into the science classroom, so that it can be "dissected", in much the same fashion as it was during the Kitzmiller vs. Dover Area School District trial, by allowing teachers to "explore the limitations of faith through the revelatory methods of science", and resulting in "verdicts" identical to Republican Federal Judge Jones' conclusion that Intelligent Design wasn't scientific. Emotionally, it is a sentiment that I found myself quite unexpectedly, at first, to be in complete agreement. However, on second thought, I concur with Ken Miller's observation that introducing Intelligent Design into science classrooms would be a "science stopper". It would conflate most students' understanding of what exactly is the difference between religious faith and science, though I suppose that some truly gifted students, like those attending prominent American high schools such as Alexandria, Virginia's Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology, and New York City's Bronx High School of Science and Stuyvesant High School, might readily understand and appreciate these distinctions. And yet I am inclined to agree more with the harsh view articulated by distinguished British paleontologist Richard Fortey in his essay published in the January 30, 2007 issue of the British newspaper Telegraph, contending that it is an absolute waste of time arguing with Intelligent Design advocates, and that they ought to be dismissed as "IDiots"; by extension, so would be the teaching of Intelligent Design alongside evolution in a science classroom. I would rather see talented students from Thomas Jefferson, Bronx Science and Stuyvesant engage themselves fruitfully in genuine scientific research of the highest caliber, than in trying to understand the metaphysical, religious nonsense known as Intelligent Design and other flavors of creationism. I think, in hindsight, so would Charles Darwin.
Don't Judge This Book By Its Cover.......2007-07-26
Alas, Darwin's great-grandson has not been well served by his publisher. Athough Chapman's description of the dramatis personae of the Kitzmiller v. Dover trial is both engaging and illuminating, the book's presentation suffers from a lack of attention by its publisher and/or editor.
The cover itself seems to advertize a work of pulp fiction, not an entertaining account of a trial with historic implications. It's reference to " . . . Oxycontin, and Other Oddities on Trial in Pennsylvania" is not only false, but unnecessary; the actual content of the book would be its best advertisement.
Another reviewer has commented on the hilariously unflattering photo of the author, which implies that the publisher does not take this book seriously. And a firmer editorial hand might have spared us such phrases as the Center for Thought and Ethics having provided certain documents "thoughtfully and ethically," and a book with a panda on the cover being referred to as "unbearable."
Apart from the general cutesiness of the author's attempts at puns, the account of the trial and its aftermath make for entertaining and informative reading.
But the final chapter, in which Chapman argues that Intelligent Design should be taught in schools so that its falsity can be demonstrated is tedious. Worse, Chapman apparently fails to appreciate the irony: he is, in essence, arguing FOR the first step of the "wedge strategy" advocated by the Discovery Institute, that is, to "Teach the Controversy," thus elevating "Intelligent Design" to a level apparently competitive with evolution. Given Chapman's obvious viewpoint expressed in the book, his failure to appreciate the implications of his final disquisition is disappointing. Not to mention that demonstrating the falsity of Intelligent Design in athe classroom might well run afoul of the Establishment clause of the Constitution.
40 Days and 40 Nights has the appearance of having been rushed into print with little attention to serious editing. The publisher should be embarrassed.
Like a box of chocolates: tasty, and with lots of nuts.......2007-07-05
This book is about the famous Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School Board case.
The school board, controlled by science-illiterate, religious fanatics and following the advice of other, science-illiterate, religious fanatics at the Thomas More Law Center, overruled Dover High's own science faculty and forced through a policy mandating that the freshman biology course include a statement that misrepresented and criticized evolutionary theory and provided information about an untested creationist alternative called "intelligent design." (Intelligent design is a "scientific" theory whose primary advocates are yet another bunch of religious kooks at the Discovery Institute.)
After the school board passed that policy, several parents sued, alleging that the policy violated the First Amendment's provision regarding separation of church and state. After a full trial, the court eventually ruled that, duh, ID was a religious theory and had no place in science class.
The book has three main ingredients. The trial itself serves as the unifying theme for the book, so the first ingredient, of course, is a description of the courtroom action, including very brief summaries of some of the testimony of the experts for both plaintiffs and defendants on the main points of the trial. Chapman does comment on some of the technical aspects of the trial, but only occasionally and very briefly. In general there is very little analysis of the merits of the scientific, legal, or philosophical arguments that both sides presented, so if you're looking for detailed information about those issues, you may want to look elsewhere.
The second ingredient is a brief summary chapter in which Chapman argues in favor of teaching creationism/ID in science classes.
The book's third and most important ingredient is the "human interest" or background stories about many of the characters on both sides of the tragicomedy of the trial; and it is this ingredient that makes the book such a tasty read. The anecdotes and revealing glimpses into the personalities, backgrounds, and motivations of the main actors are generally presented with warmth, sensitivity, and, frequently, with a great deal of humor. Many of the anecdotes were downright hilarious. Unfortunately, several anecdotes were of a more disturbing nature.
The anecdotes revealing the dishonesty of the board members and the hypocrisy of the Thomas More Law Center will probably not be surprising to anyone who has followed the evo/crevo dispute in any detail, but the reports about the school board's arrogant, religious bigotry may be shocking simply for how open and public it was. The cowardice of the Discovery Institute's William Dembski and Stephen Meyer in failing to testify was also interesting, and Dick Carpenter's unexplained disappearance was simply mystifying. (Carpenter is associated with Focus on the Family, another group of religious cranks.) Other anecdotes report on the school board members' appalling lack of intellectual curiosity about the changes they were making to the science curriculum. That will probably not surprise anyone who has followed the dispute in any detail either, since many of the pro-ID statements from school officials in Kansas a couple of years ago were just as appallingly ignorant. The vicious hate mail and personal attacks that the plaintiffs and their school-age children endured show once again that freedom isn't free. In sharp contrast to Dembski's and Meyer's cowardice, the plaintiffs showed a lot of courage in standing up to the religious bullies on the school board and in the local pulpits. If the Christian God is indeed a God of love, then some of those clergymen are going to have to answer some day for their hateful actions and comments.
Again, if you're looking for detailed, technical analyses of any part of the evo/crevo debate or a formal, historical treatment of the trial, this book is probably not going to satisfy you, but the human interest stories in this book are truly a feast.
P.S. Even if you don't buy the book, at least take a look at the inside jacket cover. The picture of Chapman is hilarious.
Book Description
The current controversy over teaching evolution in the public schools has grabbed front-page headlines and topped news broadcasts all across the United States. In the Beginning investigates the movement that has ignited debate in state legislatures and at school board meetings. Reaching back to the origins of antievolutionism in the 1920s, and continuing to the promotion of intelligent design today, Michael Lienesch analyzes one of the most formidable political movements of the twentieth century.
Book Description
The Scopes trial shocked America. Tennessee schoolteacher John Scopes brought the question of teaching evolution in schools to every dinner table, and it remains an essential topic in any course on American History, the History of Education, and Religious History. This volume’s lively interpretative introduction provides an analysis of the trial and its impact on the moral fiber of the country and the educational system, and examines the race and gender issues that shook out of the debate. The editor has excerpted the crucial exchanges from the trial transcript itself, and includes these along with reactions to the trial, taken from newspaper reports, letters, and magazine articles. Telling political cartoons and evocative photographs add a colorful dimension to this collection, while a chronology of events, questions for consideration, and a bibliography provide strong pedagogical support.
Customer Reviews:
Nice try - wins half a cigar.......2006-07-21
Let me start by saying that I liked this book a lot. In fact I'd recommend it to anyone aged 12 or over as an excellent - by the standards of America's academia - introduction to the Scopes trial.
As the author and developer of a web site devoted to the facts and myths surrounding the Scopes Trial since the end of the 20th century I am very much aware of how widely the case is misrepresented by American academics. Indeed I have documented on that web site a number of instances of the kind of twaddle written about the events in 1925 by professors of US colleges and universities. So deep has this malaise penetrated, in fact, that even Bryan's entry in the "Biographical Directory of the United States Congress, 1774-Present" claims that Bryan died on the floor of the courtroom - a "fact" drawn not from history but from the play/film "Inherit the Wind" - though the author does at least get the date right: July 26th (a Sunday, and almost exactly 5 days after the trial ended, around mid-day on July 21st).
In light of that, it is only fair to say that Moran's book is streets ahead of most other books on the subject that I've read so far, with the one exception of Edward Larson's outstanding "Summer for the Gods". Moreover, they way it is broken down into bite-size sections would seem to make it ideal as the basis for use in schools.
So, what's the problem?
In brief, Moran has collected plenty of "dots", but they aren't always accurate, and the way he "joins them up" leaves something to be desired.
To be fair, many of the inaccuracies are fairly minor; but large or small they are not what one would expect to find in a book by a history professor at the University of Kansas and, to quote the back cover: "A specialist in modern American social and cultural history".
For example, there's the claim that the phrase "trial of the century" was invented in the 1920's (page 2). It wasn't. The title had been applied to the trial of Leo Frank, back in 1913.
On page 28, Moran for some unexplained reason expands the population of Dayton from the usual estimate of 1,800 to 2,200.
And again, Moran seems confused about the nature of eugenics as practised in the USA. On page 16 he rightly only mentions "negative" eugenics - the intention to erase anyone who the eugenicists didn't approve of. But on page 68 he describes both negative AND positive eugenics as though they were both in favour. ("Positive" eugenics being the intention to get eugenically "fit" citizens to produce as many children as was reasonably possible. In practice US eugenicists abandoned "positive eugenics" quite early on and concentrated on policies that promoted only "negative eugenics". See Edwin Black's extensively researched book, "War Against the Weak".)
This last point is particularly relevant to the documentation featured in the chapter on "Race and the Scopes Trial", where we find that black writers of the period viewed the anti-evolutionists as their main enemy and seem to have completely overlooked the blatantly racist nature of eugenicist views such as those the in the textbook at the heart of the trial 'A Civic Biology', which characterised "the Ethiopian or negro type" as the lowest of the "five races".
One of the most useful features in the book is the way that readers are frequently invited to consider specific questions relevant to the material. This seemed like a sadly missed opportunity to raise a question about the various ways in which individuals and groups interpreted the events very much from the perspective of their personal views and perceptions.
Still on the subject of failing to "join up the dots", Moran, in his introduction to the documentation drawn from "A Civic Biology", omits any mention of the fact that Hunter's comments on research into the "Jukes" and "Kallikak" families refers to material which either misrepresented the evidence (in the case of the Jukes), or was based on a highly questionable, subjective methodology rather than genuinely "scientific" research; and that the use of this material is prima facie evidence of the "negative" approach by eugenicists in the USA.
Or again, in the chapter on "The Scopes Trial and the 'New Woman'" it seems strange indeed that Moran totally omits the advent of mass psychological manipulation of the American public using methods initiated by Edward Bernays, etc. This process originated in the pro-war propaganda during WWI, and was subsequently employed on behalf of American manufacturers with the express intention of changing public attitudes on a whole raft of subjects. Particularly relevant in this context is Bernays' "Torch of Freedom" campaign on behalf of the American Tobacco Company which concealed its true purpose (to radically increase cigarette sales) behind its avowed intention to "empower women" by giving them access to symbolic penises (i.e. cigarettes).
Overall it seemed to me that Moran makes every effort to be even handed to all parties, including William Jennings Bryan. Though his comment about Bryan being branded "an ignorant bigot" (page 2) is rendered the more partisan by his failure to mention that this assessment was, for the most part, only accepted by those who were anti-Bryan in the first place, whilst Darrow was characterised in much the same way by those who supported Bryan.
I gave the book four stars mainly because it compares so favourably with most other books on the subject. Taken solely as a work of objective research, however, 2.5 stars would, in my opinion, be more appropriate.
A solid case study on the Scopes "Monkey " Trial.......2004-06-01
What Jeffrey P. Moran has put together with "The Scopes Trial: A Brief History with Documents" is an excellent modern counterpart to Sheldon Norman Grebstein's "Monkey Trial: The State of Tennessee vs. John Thomas Scopes" in 1960, which was the first attempt to provide excerpts from the trial transcript with other historical documents that allow contemporary scholars to get a sense for what it was like to follow the trial of the century in 1925.
There are three main parts to Moran's look at the Scopes Trial. Part One is Moran's "Introduction: The Scopes Trial and the Birth of Modern America," which consists of setting up the trial in the context of the issues of both the evolution controversy and the struggle against "modernity," a overview of the genesis of the test case and the key stages of the trial, and at look at the aftermath of the trial. The first two sections are a concise look at the history of the trial but it is the last section where Moran makes his mark looking at not only the how the evolution issues has reemerged in recent times as creationism, but also how the conflict represented issues of regionalism, ruralism, academic freedom, race, and gender.
Part Two: "The Scopes Trial Day by Day: Transcript and Commentary" abandons the distinct stages Moran set up in his introduction to look at the trial each day. What Moran provides are excerpts from the trial transcript and one or more newspaper accounts covering the trial. For example, the second day's proceedings find both a transcript of defense attorney Clarence Darrow's speech in defense of religious liberty and journalist H.L. Mencken's column "Darrow's Speech Great but Futile." The celebrated duel in the shade when Darrow cross-examined Bryan is presented in sections focusing on the whale swallowing Jonah, Joshua commanding the sun to stand still, the flood wiping out civilization, and the chapter of Genesis, followed by the New York Times story "Laughter at Bryan's Expense."
The part I most applaud is Moran's inclusion of most of Dudley Field Malone's reply to William Jennings Bryan on the fifth day on the issue of the admission of expert testimony from scientific experts, because that corrects what I consider to be the major flaw in Edward J. Larson's "Summer for the Gods: The Scopes Trial and America's Continuing Debate Over Science and Religion." Larson reduces Malone's speech, the oratorical highlight of the trial, to two paragraphs, one on the speech and the other on the reaction of the crowd. What he misses are that Malone's speech represents the position of reconciliation in which evolution and Genesis were seen as being compatible rather than contradictory. It is only under Judge Raulston rules against the scientific testimony that the Scopes defense is left with no other option but to put Bryan on the stand and hold him up to ridicule, ask for their client to be convicted, and start working on the appeal. While Moran pays even less attention to Malone's speech in his introduction, those who read it are going to be impressed by not only its oratorical flourishes but his arguments, which are the most reasonable articulated during the trial.
The final part of Moran's book looks at "The Scopes Trial and the Culture of the 1920s: The Documents." This includes seven cartoons on the trial and its participants followed by sections devoted to the issues Moran had set up earlier: race, educational freedom, the "New Woman," religious alternative, and the invasion of "outsiders." The highpoints in this section are W.E.B. Du Boi's article "Dayton IS America," Bryan's "Who Shall Control Our Schools?", a pair of letters from women in Tennessee supporting the Butler Act, and the Reverend John Roach Straton's "A Fundamentalist Defends Tennessee against Outside Invasion." Most of these documents are from 1925, although a few come earlier and later. If you were paying attention to the Scopes Trial that year these are what you would have been reading about in the press. One interesting choice is the section included from George W. Hunter's "A Civil Biology," the science textbook used at Dayton's high school, is not about evolution but rather about race and eugenics (but the evolutionary tree in Hunter that Bryan ridiculed is provided during his first speech).
For all of the documents Moran provides a brief introduction providing necessary background information and raising at least one question that readers can consider while reading each section. There are a series of photographs from the trial in the first part of the book, but neither of the shots I have seen of Darrow questioning Bryan on the platform outside the Rhea County Courthouse. I did my dissertation on the Scopes Trial and was impressed with how Moran edited the trial transcript because he includes not only the key arguments for each stage of the trial, but he also works in the most infamous exchanges between the lawyers. I can quibble on some of the selections from journalists (I always liked the coverage of the trial by the "Commonweal") and the editorial cartoons, but what is provided certainly performs the desired functions.
The biggest irony behind the Scopes Trial is that John Thomas Scopes never taught evolution in Dayton, Tennessee in 1925. He was substituting for the regular science teacher and as the school's football coach worked on plays with his boys. That was the main reason the defense did not allow Scopes to take the stand and when Howard Morgan was examined on the fourth day of the trial the young student had to be prepped on what was in the Hunter textbook (which, in another irony, was the mandated textbook selected by the state that had to be taught in class). But in the final analysis Scopes' innocence was a minor consideration in the clash of forces at Dayton, Tennessee in the summer of 1925, which Moran's book amply evidences.
Wonderful Introduction to the Scopes Trial.......2002-06-15
The Scopes Trial: A Brief History with Documents is a wonderful introduction to the Scopes "monkey" trial and its significance in history. I found the narrative history to be a quick but compelling and informative read, and was especially interested in the way in which the author shows how events during the time period following the First World War influenced the parties and helped to explain their motivations. I also found the documents, including excerpts from the trial transcript and newspaper articles of the time to be very helpful in understanding the manner in which the trial developed and the manner in which it was perceived nationally. Anyone looking for a readable yet informative work on the Scopes trial would be well advised to look into this book.
Customer Reviews:
Outstanding - Standing On The Shoulders of Giants.......2005-12-07
'Science on Trial' is exactly what "intelligent design" is forcing upon the public - but the public doesn't have the educational background to grasp it and creationism is an easy answer to grasp... too bad. Human is as human does.
Futuyma is clear and concise and almost as entertaining as Stephen J. Gould, Richard Dawkins or Desmond Morris (who are almost as entertaining as Mark Twain in "Letters From The Earth.").
This book should be in every public library in every republic in the world. Give Intelligence (not intelligent design) A Chance.
Futuyma's "Science on Trial" Doesn't Pass the 'Facts' Test.......2005-07-10
This 1995 Edition is similar to the 1983 version. A serious science researcher should not waste good money on this book - it cannot be considered a serious, reliable scientific reference. It is a great disappointment in scholarship, little more than a screedy, anti-Christian diatribe, railing against Creationists who dare think that Evolution is not good science. Particularly, his addressing of the Second Law of Thermodynamics is wide of the mark, just flat erroneous. Much of Futuyma's book is replete with combative language about Christians who embrace Creation. His inflammatory language only serves the notion that this book is not about science, but about philosophy. His scholarship about the Bible is particularly deficient.
One of the best "Creation Science" debunkers.......2005-01-24
Though a little outdated since the pseudo-scientists calling themselves "creation scientists" have long since gone to "intelligent design" since they clearly lost the previous debates. However Futuyma does an excellent job of showing the clash between two world views and why creationism should never be taught as science in the classroom. Simply because it isn't science.
One thing I enjoyed in the book was how the author showed that people who can acknowledge Darwin was right, can still live a moral, decent life in harmony with others. Darwinism was misused by many who focused on the "survival of the fittest" theme whereas Darwinism brings humans into the great biological family that is all life on our planet. Humanity is no longer a battle against nature, but is man as a part of nature with interdependencies and symbiotic relationships that should be embraced and celebrated.
The sad reality is, that the creation myths are so vital to Christian Fundamentalism and the idea that Jesus died to save us from Adam's fall, that true believers of Christianity will cling to these irrational beliefs regardless what the evidence tells them. Even so, giving into fundamentalism and rejecting science will bring us into the intellectual darkness you see in the middle east.
Futuyma was one of the first courageous souls to stand up and do battle with the fundamentalists on this battleground. Reason and science owe him a big debt for this book. I'm glad other scientists have stepped forward to defend the application of the scientific method against the forces promoting superstition.
I welcome feedback on this and all reviews at wstrnlibwarrior@yahoo.com
A well-written book.......2004-11-17
Futuyama does take on the Creationists on their own playing field. That is, he addresses their arguments that evolution fails to answer some questions that they have devised.
Creationist arguments sometimes include claims of the Earth being very young. The author shows that these are falsified by elementary geology. Matter of fact, some of them are falsified by elementary archaeology.
Another claim is that the second law of thermodynamics prevents order from arising naturally. Futuyama shows that's false. First the Earth is not a closed system: we get useful energy from the Sun, as well as from volcanic vents. In addition, has anyone making this claim ever seen a snowflake? It is easy for order to arise naturally. As a matter of fact, order tends to arise in a gravitational system as well, as anyone looking at our Solar System can observe. And an embryo becoming an adult shows an enormous increase in order.
One common claim is that life could not have originated "by chance." But, as Futuyama explains, this is suspect, given the compatability of the Earth with life, and given the presence of the ingredients. I agree. Sure, one can do a sloppy calculation, and say there is little chance for life to originate. But given that there is life here, the chances of that calculation being wrong are high. It's unreasonable to make an argument of the form, "I'm not smart enough to figure out exactly how life got here, therefore it never did get here."
There are also claims that mutation, recombination and natural selection can't form new features. In response, Futuyama shows how small changes have led to new features. And he also answers the question of how a new function, such as sight can develop so that each step confers a competitive advantage.
One favorite claim of creationists is the lack of intermediate fossils. But many of those intermediates actually have been discovered, as Futuyama ponts out.
But, of course, had Futuyama failed to answer these questions, that would not overthrow evolution, which is simply a set of facts. The key to accepting evolution is the positive evidence in its favor, which is so overwhelming that little if any argument needs to be made once one has these facts.
As Futuyama shows, that evidence includes fossil records, DNA, embryology, and homologies. And it is significant that these facts are consistent: as the author explains, a single undisputed Pre-Cambrian fossil of a flowering plant or mammal would falsify most of evolution as we understand it.
There is also a chapter on some of what bothers many Creationists, "social darwinism." This is a moral philosophy that attempts to justify unethical behavior on the grounds of natural selection. Futuyama points out that it is dubious to justify any ethical system on such grounds, and that the claims of the social darwinists are bogus. Again, I agree. I don't believe that ethical systems need to be based on the existence or non-existence of evolution. And they certainly do not need to be based on lies, nor should they be. We ought to know and teach the truth about evolution.
I think this is a valuable guide to evolution and the creationist attacks on it.
good science, bad philosophy.......2004-11-11
Futuyma's Science on Trial is really two books. One is a lucid, accessible, and convincing argument against so-called creation science. I don't think any reasonable person could come away unconvinced as to the fact of evolution.
Unfortunately there is another book in here too. Whenever Futuyma wanders off topic into biblical scholarship, theology, metaphysics, ethics, politics, or anything except science, he generally shows himself to be about as plug ignorant on those subjects as the creationists are about science. Expertise in biology does not automatically entitle you to hold forth in these other disciplines. Stick to the science and, please, a little humility.
One thing that particularly irritated me is that Futuyma rather airily dismisses the possibility that something could be at the same time undoubtedly true and yet undermining of the basis for any truly humane morality. I think that is dangerously naive. Futuyma needs to read his Nietzche and his Sophocles. As the former noted there can exist such a thing as a DESTRUCTIVE truth. Or as Oedipus states, "The truth is pain, for those who see." What the Greek tragedian suspected, we now know. Ironically, it is Futuyma here who is the totally uncritical follower of the Gospel of John. "The truth shall set you free." If only it were that simple.
Book Description
When All the Gods Trembled narrates the drama of the famous Scopes Monkey Trial, and describes the varied attempts by early 20th century Americans to accommodate Darwinism into their religious traditions. Conkin's sweeping narrative about this complex relationship is destined to change the way all Americans think about Darwin, the Scopes trial, and American religious and intellectual thought.
Customer Reviews:
6 essays on how darwin changed american religion.......2003-07-26
Even if you disagree with every word he writes, you can't put the book down. it is that good. I have a hard time pointing out exactly what it is that makes this such a good book: partly he is an extraordinarily interesting writer, partly the book is chock full of absolute gems, i highlighted something on nearly every page. Partly the attentiveness to what lies underneath the surface, what isn't obvious about the topic in his hands becomes insight, the ah-ha experience that has you saying "why didn't i see that before?" But mostly, he is an addictive writer, drawing you into his comprehensive research, sharing his love of the ideas he presents, pulling you into his intellectual world more like a good novelist than the historian he is.
He spells out the topic on the first page of the preface:
"What follows are six essays. They involve large, often cosmic issues. They involve a challengeable assumption--that the most foundational beliefs of Americans, almost all of which derive from the Judeo-Christian tradition, faced such an array of intellectual challenges in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries as to amount to a major crisis of faith. This crisis first climaxed in the mid-1920's, but the issues have remained at the very center of cultural conflict. The crisis involved the credentials of age-old beliefs in the existence of a god, in a world that exhibits some extrinsic or intrinsic purpose, in the divine origin and special destiny of humans, and in moral values that have some transhuman sanction."
One feature of the book that is admirable is the accuracy he presents the beliefs of people he disagrees with. For instance, his portrait of J.Gresham Machen is one of the best i've ever read, even though the author is not a discipline of Machen's tradition. This desire to be a good responsible historian makes the book at places where a lesser author would distort the record. You instinctive trust the history presented because you know the places he could have fudged, he didn't/
One of his big conclusions, is i believe, the BIG issue in the current Creation-Evolution-Design debate. In his own words, pg 141--"For many, the important issue was not which one of several competing gods fit reality, but whether a belief in either a supernatural or an immmanent god any longer made sense. Could anyone, in a post-Darwinian world, justify such a belief? Theism was now at stake. And those who felt themselves most attuned to the full implications of a Darwinian understanding of nature joined Darwin himself in rejecting any transcendent god (any god outside or beyond nature) and any purposeful divine mind or force within nature (and thus any cosmic teleology)."
I deeply appreciated the book, it interested me enough in the short sketches of several thinkers that i will pursue studies of them. While at the same time it put several pieces into place for me because of the unique and systematic way the author built his case. I hope you find it as fruitful an afternoon with the book as did i.
thanks for reading this short review.
A well-balanced, intellectual and thoughtful discourse.......2002-03-17
When All The Gods Trembled: Darwinism, Scopes, And American Intellectuals by Paul Conkin (Distinguished Professor of History, Vanderbilt University) is a collection of superbly reasoned and presented historical essays about the overwhelming impact science has had upon American religious thought, especially during the 1920s when "all the gods trembled" before the evolutionary theories of Darwinism. A well-balanced, intellectual and thoughtful discourse on the very serious and perplexing questions that science poses to faith When All The Gods Trembled is highly recommended reading for both students and general readers with an interest in the impact of 19th and 20th sciences on religious belief systems in the United States.
Average customer rating:
- Bringing the Scopes Trial to Life
- Won't you take me to, Monkey Town?
- solid, likable historical coming of age
|
Monkey Town: The Summer of the Scopes Trial
Ronald Kidd
Manufacturer: Simon & Schuster Children's Publishing
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover
1900s
| Fiction
| United States
| History & Historical Fiction
| Children's Books
| Subjects
| Books
Mysteries, Espionage, & Detectives
| Science Fiction, Fantasy, Mystery & Horror
| Literature
| Children's Books
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Literature
| Children's Books
| Subjects
| Books
Other
| Multicultural Stories
| People & Places
| Children's Books
| Subjects
| Books
Fiction
| Emotions & Feelings
| Social Situations
| People & Places
| Children's Books
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Ages 9-12
| Children's Books
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Issues
| Children's Books
| Subjects
| Books
Historical Fiction
| History & Historical Fiction
| Teens
| Subjects
| Books
Love & Romance
| Literature & Fiction
| Teens
| Subjects
| Books
Look Inside Children's Books
| Trip
| Specialty Stores
| Books
Look Inside Teen Books
| Trip
| Specialty Stores
| Books
Similar Items:
-
Breaking Through
-
The Book Thief (Readers Circle)
-
Christopher Killer: Forensic Mystery 1 (Forensic Mystery)
-
Born to Rock
-
The Loud Silence of Francine Green
ASIN: 1416905723 |
Book Description
In a story rife with first love and the pain of growing up, master storyteller Ronald Kidd reincarnates the most enduring trial of the twentieth century.
School is out in the summer of 1925 in Dayton, Tennessee. For Frances Robinson, a fifteen-year-old daydreamer with a crush on her teacher, John T. Scopes, summer vacation promises tennis, and Coca-Colas from her father's drug store. But when Frances's father, the school board chairman, has Scopes arrested for teaching evolution, the sleepiest place on earth becomes a hotbed for famous thinkers, including H. L. Mencken, Clarence Darrow, and William Jennings Bryan. Overnight the world is flocking to Dayton to decide: Are people really descended from monkeys? Does the theory of evolution have a place in biology class? As Frances sees the man she loves crumbling beside her, she begins to question her town, her neighbors, and the father she has always trusted.
Readers will devour this colorful yet tender story -- reminiscent of To Kill a Mockingbird -- told from the perspective of a young girl as she evolves into a woman.
Customer Reviews:
Bringing the Scopes Trial to Life.......2006-06-12
When fifteen-year-old Frances Robinson becomes caught up in the famous Scopes trial, nothing--neither her town nor her parents nor her own life--will ever be the same. In his latest novel, Monkey Town, Ron Kidd touches on universal themes to recreate a world that not only is past for us today, but also is slipping like sand through the fingers of his main character. Anyone who has lived through the teenage years or is currently fighting through that confusing life stage will recognize the doubts, the disillusionments, and also the discoveries about herself and those around her that Frances encounters during one long, hot summer. In learning that people--even those closest to her--are not always what they seem, she matures from a child to a young woman ready to seek her own destiny in the world. The real strength of this novel is Kidd's portrayal of the complex characters woven into the story and the nostalgic portrayal of small town life in 1920s Tennessee. Both children and adults will thoroughly enjoy this book.
Won't you take me to, Monkey Town?.......2006-05-24
You know what the bane of a children's librarian's life is? Well-written middle reader titles. You know what I mean. They're those charming tomes with protagonists that are young teens. These books are written with a very definite readership in mind and they are a nightmare to deal with collectionwise. If your local library has a children's section AND a teen section, where do you put a book like, "Monkey Town"? It's so incredibly well-written with interesting facts and some amazing plotting that you're inclined to put it in the children's room. Then again, the character is obviously a teen and we're dealing with some pretty heavy topics in this novel. Evolution. The existence of God. Small town life vs. big city snobbery. This is a coming of age novel in the best sense of the term, but it makes my life a misery. It would have been so much easier to catalogue had the book been badly written or boring. Then I could have just urged the Powers That Be not to purchase it at all. Instead, I'll reluctantly hand it to the Young Adult librarians in my branch and pray that tweens and early teens find it lurking there. Cause until our libraries start creating Middle Reader Librarians and rooms, books like "Monkey Town" will be straddling two entirely different readerships.
Frances luuuvs Johnny. Johnny Scopes, that is. Heard of him? Well he's the young college kid who graduated and took a post in fifteen-year-old Frances's high school. She thinks he's dreamy, but he treats her more like a kid sister than the sophisticated dame she'd like to be. Frances loves Johnny but there are other problems apart from their age difference. You see, Frances's father is Frank Earle Robinson, owner of Robinson's Drugs. One day, Mr. Robinson and some of the town leaders come up with a scheme that'll get the city of Dayton, Tennessee a little more publicity. You see, the state of Tennessee makes it illegal to teach evolution in schools. Now the ACLU wants a Tennessee teacher to be a test case that can bring this law to the courts. Mr. Robinson and his friends want that someone to be Johnny Scopes. He taught the kids evolution in the last year, didn't he? Reluctantly Johnny agrees, but only with the given understanding that he'll keep his job in the end. Still, nobody could expect the maelstrom of activity that is brought to bear on this formerly sleepy burg once the trial approaches. And for Frances, the influx of folks from out of town means that she's exposed to new thoughts and ideas. Maybe evolution and creation are not diametrically opposed. Maybe her father isn't as great a guy as she thought he was. And maybe even in a small homey town like Dayton, there's a lot of nastiness that lurks deep in the hearts of even the "nicest" of people.
"Inherit the Wind" for the kiddie set? Not exactly. The real focus of this novel is on Frances herself. Through her eyes we get to meet all the major players in the Scopes Trial. For example, she hangs out with Johnny for fun and through him meets the larger-than-life H.L. Mencken. Author Ronald Kidd really is at his best when he gives us Mencken, writ large. The man's as pompous and vile-spewing as ever, but with more ugly truths and conflicting tendernesses than you'd find in your average historical fiction for the kiddies. We also meet the great William Jennings Bryan and Clarence Darrow, each in their own peculiar particular way. Incorporating real historical figures into a children's book can sometimes feel forced or awkward. Not here. The advantage that, "Monkey Town" has over its historical fiction fellows is the character of Frances Robinson herself. Based on a real woman of the same name, Kidd explains in his Author's Note how he came to meet Ms. Robinson and which parts of this story were true, and which his own. This lends an authenticity to the novel, to say nothing of Kidd's own skills at incorporating the believable with the possible.
Truth be told, this really is a story about Frances. It's the old story of a small-town girl curious about the greater world around her. By the end of the book you're sure that soon Frances will get out of Dayton and see the wider world. Maybe she'll go to college! It's with a bittersweet afterthought, then, that one reads the story of the read Frances Robinson. She never left Dayton but instead married the local high school football coach. After a book showing her growth and maturity, it seems more than a little sad to find that the facts of the matter don't line up with the story the author told. That's nobody's fault, of course. It just shows how inconvenient the truth can sometimes be.
What Kidd does so well with this book is allow the reader to make up their own mind on the evolution debate. He isn't preaching anymore than Frances is. We see the good and bad of both sides of the debate and are allowed to reason out how we feel as a result. Maybe that's the real beauty of, "Monkey Town". While Frances is dealing with a too too complicated world, we also are seeing the dimensions and two-sides of every character. And Kidd cleverly makes us challenge our own assumptions, even going so far as to play on our worst instincts when it comes to Frances's father. For quite some time he comes off as a particularly well-aligned villain, only to be redeemed in a wholly believable way by the end.
If I had to come up with a problem I had with the book, maybe it would involve the factual aspects of the story. I would have loved a nice Bibliography at the back. Failing that, maybe a section outlining exactly what was true and what wasn't with a little more certainty. Instead we get a nice section in which Kidd thanks a whole host of people but doesn't refer us elsewhere. Kids wanting to learn more about the Scopes Trial will have to seek out books and websites on their own, I fear. A bit of a pity.
Small potatoes, though. After all, there are plenty of well-cited works of historical fiction out there that haven't half the guts and gall of this little number. A remarkable story, a great book, and definitely a piece of worthwhile reading. Kidd really does harness the innate drama of the real trial for all he's worth. Now to figure out where to put it in my library.... hm....
solid, likable historical coming of age.......2006-04-17
Why do reviewers persist in making these ridiculous comparisons between books that can only serve to disappoint a reader? Ignore the reviews and the book jacket blurbs--there is simply no comparison between Monkey Town and To Kill a Mockingbird, except that both have a young girl narrator who witnesses a trial and both are written using words. That isn't to say Monkey Town is bad, but it has nowhere near the richness of language, character, or plot that Mockingbird does. Neither do 99 percent of other novels which is what, after all, makes Mockingbird a classic.
So if it's no Mockingbird, what is it? A solidly likable coming-of-age novel with a nicely historical setting. Almost all you need to know is in the title: it's summer, the Scopes trial is about to begin, and the town that hosts it--Dayton Tn--is not going to come off so well.
The narrator is 15-year-old Frances, whose father managed to convince a local teacher (Johnny Scopes) to be the focus of the test case pro-evolution people were looking for. This isn't because Frances' father is a believer in evolution--just the opposite. To him it's simply a huge publicity stunt to save a town he's concerned is losing it vitality. This is the book's opening premise and from it two basic storylines emerge.
One is the trial itself, with lots of historical references and frequent appearances by acidic H.L. Mencken (who takes an endearing liking to Frances) and less-frequent appearances by other historic personages, such as Clarence Darrow. We also get some well-handled glimpses of the trial itself thanks to Frances' ability to get a good seat. There isn't much new here with regard to the trial itself, with the exception of Mencken's presence--one which adds a wonderfully biting spark to the book. What is nicely done however is the way the author connects the trial to actual living individuals, showing its impact on real lives. Usually events relegated to the abstraction of "history" quickly lose their human attachment and Kidd does a nice job reattaching this set piece.
The other story, and the main one, is Frances' coming of age. And there are a myriad of ways in which this happens. Before the summer of the trial, she moved in an innocent world filled with flawless people: Johnny Scopes, on whom she has a typically powerful crush; her infallible father who does only good; her strong mother; her ever-faithful best friend; a warm and beneficent town; God. By the end of the book, all of these people have had the patina of perfection rubbed off of them in some fashion or another. Though Frances has her resolution, mostly positive, with all these losses, Kidd shows that things will never be the same again--Frances is no longer a little girl in a bubble.
The course of the trial, of course, is well-known, though perhaps not to the target audience (depending on what they've gotten in school) but still holds some tension due to its impact on the characters. The coming-of-age story is relatively predictable--one knows Frances will have her heart broken, will see a darker side of her father, etc.--and relatively benign, but is enjoyable if not particularly compelling or insightful. The side characters, with the exception of Mencken are not truly three-dimensional, but they serve their purpose. Mencken, on the other hand, is a true delight and the book picks up greatly whenever he and Frances are together. There is one forced scene where Frances must confront the town's darker elements and here unfortunately is also the strongest connection to Mockingbird, reading as a poor person's version of the scene with Atticus guarding Tom on the porch of the jail. But this is the only truly weak scene in the book.
In the end, Monkeytown stands out more for the character of Mencken than anything else, but if it isn't an outstanding book, it's certainly a pleasing one. Somewhat recommended.
Book Description
The Scopes Monkey Trial in Dayton, Tennessee was a watershed moment in the history of this country. The ramifications of those proceedings are still being felt today. However, it is not necessarily the arguments from the courtroom floor that are reverberating in the halls of America today. The way the entire event was conducted and perceived by the rest of the nation set the tone for how creationists and evolutionists have been viewed by society ever since.
Marvin Olasky and John Perry tell the true story in Monkey Business. Most people have a misunderstanding of what happened based on slanted newspaper reporting accounts of H. L. Menken, who made fun of creationists. As a result, the case for creationism has been crippled in the eyes of society. But this account of what happened is far from accurate. Monkey Business will offer the facts of the story and an apologetic for divine creation.
Customer Reviews:
A little "Intelligent Design" would have helped this book.......2007-01-02
This is a story that needed to be told from a new perspective, but, unfortunately, the execution of this idea could have been far better.
The story is important for two reasons. First, William Jennings Bryan was a truly great American, yet H.L. Mencken and "Inherit the Wind" make him look like a Bible-quoting buffoon. If you are not familiar with Bryan, ten minutes of research will reveal to you a very compassionate Christian, not the distorted cartoon drawn by Mencken and accepted by our popular culture.
Second, The Theory of Evolution has many flaws, yet the attitude of many adherents to this theory reminds one of some sort of blind secular faith. They seem to have an unwillingness to debate or discuss weaknesses in the theory. For them, the verdict is in and the time for debate is over. They feel that skeptics of their orthodoxy are either stupid or blinded by their own narrow religious beliefs. This unwillingness to address critics is unhealthy for science. "Monkey Business", especially in the chapters dealing with intelligent design, provides a much-needed challenge to evolution.
Unfortunately, the execution of the book suffers in three respects. First, the chapter design gets in the way of the narrative. Here is an outline of the chapters:
1. Context
2.-7. Trial narrative, including pre-trial.
8.-9. Context on evolution.
10.-13. Trial narrative continues.
14.-15. Context on battles over evolution up to and including 1950s.
16. Context on atheism and evolution.
17. Trial narrative, cross-examination of Bryan.
18. Context on journalists backing evolution.
19. Trial narrative, the last week and Bryan's death.
20. Post-trial narrative, consequences.
21. Contemporary opposition to evoluton.
22. Intelligent design.
23. Intelligent design vs. evolution in four states (contemporary).
24. Intelligent design advantages.
25.-26. Concluding chapters with "takeaways" for readers.
The organization of chapters is really messy and makes it hard for the reader to keep the story in the forefront. In general, it is a good idea to take readers away from the story for awhile to acquire some interesting context, but I felt really "jerked" away from the story and then back to it in this book. Chapters 14 through 16 should have been moved further back in the book, as this is too long of a break from the narrative and it deals with events that occurred much after the main story. Chapter 17 and 19 and 20 are surrounded by context chapters.
Dividing this book into four parts might have helped: Part I - The Story of the Trial - every chapter through 20 with the exception of 14-16; Part II - The Early Fight Against Evolution and Atheism - Chapter 14-16; Part III - The Contemporary Fight Against Evolution (including intelligent design) - Chapter 21-24; Part IV - Lessons for Readers (Takeaways). Since this is the history of the Scopes Trial and later battles against the theory of evolution, why not use time as your organizing principal?
Second, the writing style could be more lively. I'll leave this up to others to judge, but I felt the style could have been more appealing.
Lastly, Over 80 pages of Appendices seemed to be "filler", that I did not want to pay for when I purchased the book. Appendix C and D are related to the trial, but Appendix A and B are a transcript from a radio program and reprints from "World" magazine. Their inclusion seemed excessive.
This is an important book on an important event (Scopes Trial) and a vital issue (the question of human origins). I wish the execution had been better, but anyone interested in these two topics would still make a good investment of their time by reading "Monkey Business".
Duh!.......2006-06-02
The author essentially used the Scopes trial as a cover, because standing by itself nobody would buy or show interest in this poorly written, poorly thought out piece.
The only thing this book is REALLY about is selling "intelligent design" theory, which is as much a "scientific theory" as Flying Spaghetti Monsterism.
Can science be value-laden? Sure. (The quest for discovery of antibiotics is value laden, the value being that humans are more valuable than bacteria. Does that invalidate antibiotics?) Does science provide mechanisms to test and re-assess those values? Sure.
Does intelligent creation provide such tests? No. Hence, it is not a science.
End of story. And see? It was so much less painful than reading the circular reasoning of this dishonestly packaged work.
How to Shoot Yourself in the Foot 101.......2006-02-16
The first problem with this book is that it isn't quite what it seems to be.
The second problem is that the authors start out making a valid point - but end up shooting themselves in the collective foot.
The book isn't what it seems to be because it has a very strong subtext, which actually becomes the main text for more than 80 of the 326 pages (plus notes, bibliography and index).
Olasky and Perry start out with a reasonably interesting, readable but hardly inspiring account of the events surrounding the Scopes "monkey" trial of 1925. It covers the facts fairly competently, but adds very little of any consequence to the material which makes up the far more interesting and comprehensive account of the trial to be found in "Summer for the Gods" by Edward Larson.
But then, having presented this as a piece of genuine scholarship, the authors mutilate their collective foot by sliding off into the subtext: The Scopes Trial has been grieviously misrepresented in the plays and film versions of "Inherit the Wind"; and on page 181 we come to what seems to be the primary motivation for writing the book - a critique of evolutionism as a religion and the comparative value of the concept of intelligent design.
Hold it!
Where did that come from in an account of the events of 1925?
The front cover of the book says this is "The true story of the Scopes Trial". There's nothing about this being a defence of intelligent design except for the rather ambiguous final sentence of the back cover blurb:
"[the authors] show that advocates of creationism and intelligent design have nothing to be ashamed of."
How about the fact that this book is a real "pig in a poke"? In my personal opinion someone ought to feel some regret about that for a start.
My recommendation to anyone interested in the Scopes Trial would be to give this book a miss. There's plenty of information on the web about the myths surrounding the Scopes Trial. And as far as books are concerned, in my opinion you'd be a whole lot better off with Larson's "Summer for the Gods" where you'll get what you've paid for.
Of Monkies and Un-Evolved Humans.......2005-11-24
A false dichotomy has been built in the non-scientific Creationist camp, and with it is implicit the assumption that if Evolution - though a Fact of Science - could, nonetheless, be disproved, then (by default) this proves the existence of an almighty, omniscient, benevolent Creator.
"But wait...!!" They shout, "Who are you to say that the THEORY of Evolution is a fact of science?" This question stems from an unfortunate, common misunderstanding of the word "theory". "Theory" merely refers to a framework by which processes can be explained. Thus, we have the uncontested Theory of Gravity and the Theory of Plate Tectonics. Now - we all know gravity exists, and we should all be aware, at this stage, that Evolution does too. Creationists (now re-marketing themselves as the more scientific Intelligent Design advocates) are growing exasperated by the Scientific Community's growing refusal to let their misinformation stand unchallenged. Creationist pseudo-science has been soundly beaten and the answers to all supposed "Questions Darwinist's Would Rather Avoid" are available to anybody honestly seeking the truth rather than a convenient belief that will compliment their religious convictions.
Perhaps it is for this reason that Marvin Olasky reaches into the past and attempts to breath honour and nobility into the ignorance that brought us the Scope's Trial. Here he presents the Prosecution as both the majority view and the underdog, victimized by a Liberal Media. No amount of spin though, can put a positive light on the absurdly simple William Jennings Bryan ("associated prosecuting council") who, under cross-examination from Clarence Darrow, made the mystifying claim that "If God had wanted a sponge to think, a sponge could think." He also asserted that humans are not mammals. Bryan further displayed his utter stupidity by expressing his belief that the world couldn't possibly be older than five thousand years. This Literalist Biblical interpretation puts Scope's Trial creationists not only at odds with Biology, but with History, Geology, Common Sense and Decency as well. How could the media, liberal or otherwise, do anything other than laugh at this flagrant buffoonery?
The title of the book, Monkey Business is, itself, a rather annoying reminder of red-faced rants I've heard in which an indignant Creationist will express his disgust in the idea that Man was born of Monkey. It's worth mentioning that this isn't, nor has it ever been, the claim of Darwinism. Darwin never asserted that Man was spawned from Monkey, but rather that both species evolved from a common ancestry. The fossil record now clearly indicates that this is correct. Creationists like to claim that there are inexplicable breaks in the fossil record. They are behind the times. The gaps have since been filled, proving Evolution (again).
What makes Evolution worth fighting for? Simply: Our understanding of Evolution determines our future progress. Viruses grown immune to antibiotic treatment can not be understood outside of an evolutionary context. Genetic diseases must be understood in an evolutionary context. As acclaimed geneticist Theodosius Dobzhansky said, "Nothing in Biology makes sense, except in the light of Evolution." We all stand to lose if Evolution is marginalized in American schools.
There are those who like to try and turn the tables with the claim that Science itself is the dogmatic religion and that the Intelligent Design advocates are merely trying to promote "open-mindedness". This implies a mis-understanding of what Science actually is. Science isn't an arbitrarily chosen belief system, like a religion, based on bias, superstition, fear and ignorance. Science is a system by which we test, observe and conclude based only on reproducible experiments that are then subject to rigorous peer-review and validation. If a piece of the puzzle doesn't fit, Science will not distort it to make it fit or omit its presence to pretend it doesn't exist. Individuals who do this will be found out - by Science.
The Blurb for this book makes the astonishing assertion that modern creationists have nothing to be ashamed of.
Let us think on this. If it is not the believers of creationism that should bear their shame who, then, should? Perhaps it is the propagators of pseudo-science - who have led people to believe that there is some type of debate in the Scientific Community when there is not - that should be ashamed. And as for this book, Olasky should be ashamed. Ashamed of his poor hack-work, ashamed of his plain ignorance, and ashamed of his own un-evolved mind that has left him far behind; somewhere in the Dark Ages.
Debunking Debunkers: A Solid History of the Scopes Trial........2005-10-17
Many years ago as a young undergraduate in college, I read a collection of H.L. Mencken's articles. Included as a matter of course were his dispatches the 1925 Scopes trial in Tennessee. Like many readers before and since, I revelled in Mencken's portrait of the intellectual giant Clarence Darrow, and chuckled appropriately at his elitist view of Dayton residents as ignorant backcountry yokels and hicks. I also, like many readers before and since, I mistook his reporting for historical fact. It was not. Mencken, the great debunker, had his own agenda and was rather careless in his reporting of the substance of the trial. Unfortunately, his views have subsequently become the dominant interpretation among historians and journalists alike. 'Monkey Business: The True Story of the Scopes Trial' re-examines the Scopes trial and the events which led up to it. It also provides a broad discussion of the issues at stake then and now.
The bulk of the book is devoted to refuting a number of myths that continue to flourish about the trial. Scopes was not a science teacher and in all likelyhood had never taught evolution in the classroom. Indeed, the whole trial resulted from an effort on the part of some citizens in Dayton to bring national publicity to their town in the hopes of revitalizing the local economy. The ACLU, which "defended" Scopes, was in fact simply looking for a test case on the question of teaching evolution, largely because the organization had lost its main rationale for existence (defending opponents of the draft in World War I) and needed publicity to continue. The "trial" for its part, was largely conducted out of sight from the jury, and the townspeople of Dayton were quite hospitable towards both Bryan and Darrow. In the end, Scopes was found guilty, fined $100, and his case was overturned on a technicality, much to the frustration of the defense, which had hoped to have the question heard before the Supreme Court. Alternately amusing and lively, the historical recreation of the trial is the heart of this book and alone makes it worth the purchase price.
The authors, however, are no more free of bias than Mencken was. They hope their reappraisal of the trial will also rescue Christians, especially Creationists, from the charges that they were (and are) ignorant fearful haters of the truth. Toward this end, they note that the triumph of Darwinism as scientific orthodoxy following Sputnik and the release of the film "Inherit the Wind" led philosophers such as Julian Huxley and Richard Dawkins to proclaim an end to religion and the triumph of materialism. Such ideas have consequences and the authors blame the fall of moral standards and the rise of ideas like pornography as a form of free speech upon such views. They also favorably review the work of Intelligent Design theorists like William Dembski and Michael Behe. Some readers will be disappointed with this partisanship, or at least claim that it goes to far. Intelligent Design, whatever its merits, was not at issue in 1925. But other issues were, and it is here the book makes its strongest points.
Scientists often like to portray themselves as objective observers of data unlike their academic colleages in "soft" disciplines like history. Their commitment to the scientific method, they believe, somehow insulates them from the passions and biases of other areas of study, particularly fields such as philosophy and theology. And they are simply wrong. As the authors demonstrate, Darwin and his followers did not propose evolution in opposition to religion. Instead, they argued for it as a result of particular religious understanding. Christians in Victorian England believed God would not have created imperfection. Rather than simply suggest they did not fully understand God's purpose, as previous generations had, they sought to divorce creation from God. Darwinism was successful precisely because it appeared at a time when this religious view was prevalent. Indeed, Darwin's work was guided by this view of God. Even today, as the authors note, many biologists such as Stephen Gould argue that a "sensible" God would not produce or create the arrangements found among various living organisms. It's not clear what criteria Gould has for a sensible God, but whatever they are, such criteria are clearly theological and not scientific.
In the final analysis then, the real benefit to this book is to point out that science is not free from religious values and opinions. No matter how well established Darwinian Evolution may be in the scientific community, its representatives are being dishonest when they claim that it is scientific and therefore in opposition to Intelligent Design which they mistakenly (or perhaps deliberately) equate with religious fundamentalism. Both are grounded in theology and no amount of name calling or lawsuits will change that. The days when Mencken could summarily dismiss all those who disagreed with him are over.
Amazon.com
It seems like the perfect premise--Charles Darwin's great-grandson travels by bus from New York City to Dayton, Tennessee, to witness a reenactment of the infamous 1925 Scopes trial and see how--or if--attitudes toward evolution have changed. Call it "The Voyage of the Greyhound," if you will. But it didn't work out that way.
Matthew Chapman set out to write such a book, but ended up penning this "accidental memoir." Trials of the Monkey is remarkably compelling, given that the narrative wanders back and forth in time, across continents, and all over the place thematically. Descriptions of Chapman's youthful desires, his mother's alcoholism, and the world of Hollywood screenwriting are interspersed with tales of riding along with a Dayton cop on a Friday night, spelunking with Christian students, even sipping moonshine from a jam jar in a restroom stall ("To my surprise, it's excellent").
Those seeking a detailed account of the trial may be disappointed, though Chapman does offer up evocative glimpses, such as prosecuting attorney William Jennings Bryan--renowned as an orator--quietly telling attorney for the defense Dudley Malone, "Dudley, that was the greatest speech I ever heard." The book is at its best, however, when Chapman reveals his own feelings, such as his realization that though he came in part to "poke fun at [the] hillbillies," everyone had been "just as nice as all get out" to him. The intervening 75 years since the trial may not have changed Dayton very much, but they have seen a widening of the division between creationists and evolutionists. "If something like the Scopes trial was staged now," Chapman notes, "people would be afraid for their lives." --Sunny Delaney
Book Description
"When Darwin called his second book The Descent of Man instead of The Ascent of Man he was thinking of his progeny."So declares Darwin's great-great grandson Matthew Chapman as he leaves behind his stressful career as a Hollywood screenwriter and travels to Dayton, Tennessee, where in 1925, creationist opposition to the teaching of evolution in schools was played out in a famous legal drama, the so-called Scopes Monkey Trial.The purpose of his journey is to see if opinions have changed in the intervening 75 years. A defiant atheist, Chapman records his encounters in the South, where he is confronted not only by fundamentalists still trying to banish the theory of evolution but also, ironically, by his own spiritual malaise. The outward journey becomes an inward quest in this tragicomic accidental memoir.AUTHORBIO: Matthew Chapman was born in Cambridge, England and now lives in New York City. A Hollywood screenwriter, he has also directed five films.
Download Description
Charles Darwin's great-great grandson, a highly successful Hollywood screenwriter, travels to Dayton, Tennessee. In 1925 this is where The Scopes Trial, the most famous trial of its day, put the teaching of evolution in schools in the dock, and each year there is re-enactment. Wondering how much has changed in people's attitudes in the last seventy years, and what it might be like to have a religious faith, Chapman has written a funny, sometimes dark and utterly compelling accidental memoir. Dave Eggers for the forty-somethings.
Customer Reviews:
read this!.......2007-06-12
Not your typical atheist's perspective of religion, Matthew Chapman writes with poigniancy and wit about life, love and faith.
Monkey Man Tells All.......2005-08-14
Matthew Chapman is a great talent. He is a naturally gifted and funny writer. That being said, for most of his life he was convinced he was the center of the universe. Now he is not so sure. Matthew Chapman is the great great grandson of Charles Darwin, and that is a lot to live up too. In this autobiography, Chapman's first book we discover he is the worst possible combination of human beings. He is a committed Darwinist, an atheist, a Hollywood liberal, and on top of all that, Eurotrash.
I have been doing some reading on Evolution and the Creation/Evolution conflict and came across Trials of the Monkey: An Accidental Memoir. It was a quick and enjoyable read, and for most of the book, I really wanted to hate this, Chapman's first book. But, I could not put it down. As a human being, for most of his life he was a poor excuse for a man, but by the end of the book I came to like him. The book is about Chapman's adventures in Dayton, TN home of the infamous "Monkey Trial." In between writing about going to Dayton, visiting Dayton, and leaving Dayton we learn about the life of Matthew Chapman, his parents, especially his mother, and his siblings.
While Chapman certainly has no place for organzied religion, he does admit that "faith" has a place in humanity. He also came to respect those fundamentalist Christians he interacted with in Dayton. I could say more, but would give away too much.
Are there better books about Evolution, Creationism, and The Scope's Trial, yes. That being said Trials of the Monkey: An Accidental Memoir is an enjoyable and amusing read.
Not quite what I expected, but engaging and educational.......2004-12-08
I was interested in reading this book because I knew a person who went with a group to see the Scopes Trial reenactment in the mid-1990s, and I was pleasantly surprised to see Matthew Chapman mention them with a one sentence acknowledgement in his book (yes, a group of atheists from Atlanta, it has to be them!). I really enjoyed reading this account of a British person's perspective on the South and the Bible Belt. He's a self-admitted atheist who struggles with religion because of all the inconsistencies (which any honest person will admit that religion has a lot of), but the surprise is that he also admits to having a certain kind of admiration towards people of faith, because of the effect it has on believers that he never got. He's quite honest about his own past and unfortunately goes into too much detail about his sexual discoveries as a teenager, which I didn't think fit well with the main premise behind this book.
This book is kind of two books in one, and while I bought it for information on the Scopes Trial (which I did learn quite a bit more than the little I knew about it--since he goes into fascinating detail about the trial itself), I didn't expect it to be his biography/memoir also. He alternates every few chapters between these two story lines and I thought it was too much focused on his own back history, which wasn't really fascinating to me (sorry guy, but your sexual exploits aren't worth bragging about!). A lot of it was focused on his troubled relations with his alcoholic mother, with one long, drawn out chapter about her death and funeral. I didn't see what that had to do with the Scopes Monkey Trial, and my guess is that he figured that he was only going to get one published book and it would be his only opportunity to tell his life story, now that he captured our attention with the premise of the Scopes Trial. That's the reason why I subtract a star. If he had slimmed down his life story/memoir and focused more on the Scopes Trial, I would have enjoyed this book a lot more and given it five stars. As it is, it is interesting, and I suppose you can skip the chapters on his life story and still enjoy it tremendously. I absolutely agree with his main tenets of a personal religion/faith he feels a need to develop: 1) responsibility to self; 2) responsibility to family and friends; and 3) responsibility to the world at large. His critiques of religion and materialism are right on, but he seemed to hint at his own life being driven by society's ratrace (his daughter goes to a private school in NYC, he drives an SUV, and he claims that even though he makes over a million dollars a year writing screenplays, he's having financial difficulties...sounds like he's living beyond his means, if you ask me and anyone who makes that much money and still has debt problems isn't going to get my sympathy). By the way, I bought this book marked down in price at a discount bookstore, so I hope I'm not contributing to his "affluent lifestyle". Stay on the spiritual path, Chapman! And listen to your wife more. She sounds really cool.
enjoyable recounting of a life and history.......2004-11-24
I had this book for several years, given to me as a birthday present by my wife along with Will Self's Great Apes (which I've also reviewed on Amazon.com), before finally getting around to reading it. I should have picked it up earlier. What starts out as a story of Matthew Chapman, great great grandson of Charles Darwin, traveling to Dayton, Tennessee to observe the annual re-enactment of the Scopes Trial becomes something more, the "accidental memoir" of the title. Chapman recounts some highlights and lowlights from his life, including "f-ing" himself out of an education and falling into a career as a Hollywood director and screenwriter, his relationship with his alcoholic mother. In the present, he interacts with a variety of interesting people in Dayton, Tennessee, who bend and in some instances break his stereotypes of backwoods fundamentalist Christians. An example of the latter is his "favorite creationist," Bryan College creationist Kurt Wise, to whom Chapman devotes an entire chapter and part of another.
Several chapters give a vivid account of the Scopes Trial itself, and Chapman gives references at the end for more comprehensive details. While the book does center around Dayton and the Scopes trial, the re-enactment doesn't become the planned centerpiece of the book when Chapman arrives too late to see it. He ends up speaking with the director of the play, and meeting some young Christians who are further examples of stereotype breaking, as he finds them to be quite cosmopolitan.
In the end, Chapman doesn't end up too far from where he started from, but he indicates that he's willing to give up the term "atheist" for himself in favor of "agnostic," and that his experiences in Dayton gave him a better appreciation for the multiple spiritual views endorsed by his Brazilian wife, Denise Texeiria.
I found the book a quite enjoyable read, especially with my familiarity of creationism and the Scopes Trial. I recommend it.
A Fortunate "Accident".......2003-05-07
I bought this book on vacation. I'm a person that frequently judges books by their covers and this one looked interesting. If it weren't good, it would be cute on my bookselves later. I read it in about 5 large chunks spread out over 3 days. Got a little preoccupied by it to be quite honest. It drew me right in.
I've reccommended it since to friends who have all thanked me. It has a lot going for it: history, personality, humor, honesty, insight. Memoirs are hit or miss, but Matthew Chapman is a genuinely intruiging person. What is different about this memoir is that it wasn't intended to be one. The author realized ultimately though, that his own story is the one that should be told. He wrote it with a sense of humor, candidness, perspective, and without being self-indulgent. It's a great, well-written story.
Books:
- Doing Justice: Congregations and Community Organizing
- Encyclopedia of Forensic Sciences (3-Volume Set with Online Version)
- Essential Windows Workflow Foundation (Microsoft .NET Development Series)
- Ethical Dilemmas and Decisions in Criminal Justice (Ethics in Crime and Justice)
- Feminism Unmodified: Discourses on Life and Law
- Fiance & Marriage Visas: A Couple's Guide to U.S. Immigration
- Fundamentals of Acoustics
- Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In
- Glory Road
- Government by the People, Teaching and Learning, Classroom Edition (6th Edition)
Books Index
Books Home
Recommended Books
- Tribes : A New Way of Learning and Being Together
- The Funkmasters-the Great James Brown Rhythm Sections
- Membrane Transport: A Practical Approach
- Matter in Equilibrium: Statistical Mechanics and Thermodynamics includes CD-ROM
- Steps to Writing Well with Additional Readings
- The 48 Laws of Power
- Stay. Come. Heel. Every Time.
- Batman The Complete History: The Life and Times of the Dark Knight
- Morris Lapidus: Architect of the American Dream
- Insect Societies: Nature Watch
Darwin's Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution
Defeating Darwinism by Opening Minds
Icons of Evolution: Science or Myth? Why Much of What We Teach About Evolution is Wrong
Evolution: A Theory In Crisis
Reason in the Balance: The Case Against Naturalism in Science, Law & Education
