The New Yorker has a damning piece by Allen Orr on Intelligent Design. It’s also extraordinarily late, of course: Wired devoted a cover to the subject in October of 2004. Orr’s most interesting insight is that the mathematical critique of evolutionary biology by William A. Dembski (pictured) is really very shaky. This matters because Dembski (who is probably the most famous proponent of I.D) represents himself as a hard mathematician correcting the soft science of biologists. Orr writes,
Despite all the attention, Dembski’s mathematical claims about design and Darwin are almost entirely beside the point.
By contrast, modern evolutionary biology has a very robust mathematical foundation. Why isn’t this better known to the general public? Again, from Orr:
Evolutionary biology actually features an extraordinarily sophisticated body of mathematical theory, a fact not widely known because neither of evolution’s great popularizers—Richard Dawkins and the late Stephen Jay Gould—did much math.
Technorati tag: intelligent design
Five poems about the mind
Work reinvented: Tech will drive the office evolution
As organizations navigate a new world of hybrid work, tech innovation will be crucial for employee connection and collaboration.
The way forward: Merging IT and operations
Digital transformation in any industry begins with bridging the gap between two traditionally separate teams.
Investing in people is key to successful transformation
People-related factors like talent attraction and retention and clear top-down communication will determine whether your transformation progresses or stalls.
Get the latest updates from
MIT Technology Review
Discover special offers, top stories, upcoming events, and more.