The Battle of Beginnings: Why Neither Side Is Winning the Creation-Evolution Debate

by Del Ratzsch

Book Overview

Voted one of Christianity Today's 1997 Books of the Year

Creation versus evolution. The debate is growing louder and hotter--whether in lecture halls or in between the pages of bestselling books. But neither side seems to be winning. Why?

In The Battle of Beginnings Del Ratzsch examines the history of the debate and critiques the entrenched positions that he argues merely impede progress toward the truth. Dissatisfied with both...

• Format: Paperback
• Language: English
• ISBN: 0830815295
• ISBN13: 9780830815296
• Release Date: January 1996
• Publisher: IVP Academic
• Length: 248 Pages
• Weight: 0.80 lbs.
• Dimensions: 0.8" x 6.0" x 9.0"

Customer Reviews

A Balanced Review of Creationism versus Evolutionism

The author examines the history and current state of both theories. He then goes on to discuss common misunderstandings between proponents of both theories. He rightly states that attacks against positions noone holds is a terrible waste.He then examines misconceptions both sides hold regarding the philosophy of science. He also examines theistic evolutionary theory.The book ends with a plea that scientists of all pursuasions talk to each other and suggests that such a synthesis may benefit all involved. I agree. Demagoguery tends to characterize both side of the debate. Both sides set up and fight paper tigers. If any progress is to come out of this competition (for either side) the goal of discussion should be a better understanding of each other and a better investigation of the evidence.With respect to his investigation of the Philosphy of Science I recommend another volume written by a scientist who embraces evolution and also happens to be an excellet science writer: "The Mismeasure of Man" by Stephen Jay Gould. His review of how a person's prejudice may affect their scientific investigations and conclusions should be an eye-opener for those on both side of this debate.

Philosophy of science that is actually interesting

Del Ratzsch, a philosopher of science in the Reformed tradition of evangelical Christianity, has added to his growing list of helpful and well-written books. The Battle of Beginnings is not his most recent offering, but it is certainly one of his best books. In this book, Ratzsch fairly, charitably and objectively evaluates the arguments of both opponents and proponents of the theory of evolution and scientific creationism. While not everyone will agree with his conclusions, everyone should certainly listen to him and read him. Ratzsch identifies some of the more outrageous logical blunders made by members of both schools and thought. He also shows where proponents and opponents have simply misrepresented or misunderstood the other side's argument. One of the most valuable sections of the book provides a superbly written historical survey of the philosophy of science. Ratzsch also adds his own attempt to describe this thing we call science, even though it is a very slippery thing to do. Finally, Ratzsch also discusses the possibility of theistic evolution as a viable option for Christian believers and identifies some of problems with arguments had against this view, while admitting its weaknesses.I found this book to be erudite, level-headed and easy to read. It is also easily understood by nonphilosophers and is a book that can be used as a reference book without reading like one. I also found Ratsch's fairness very refreshing in a field where polemics tend to take a front seat to logic. My only reservations about the book is that he might be a little too accommodating to poor arguments. While one certainly has to appreciate Ratsch's desire to give the creationist's use of the Second Law of Thermodynamics a full hearing, I was a little less enamoured with his use of Patterson's article. John W. Patterson wrote an article entitled "Thermodynamics and Evolution" for the book "Scientists Confront Creationism," which was edited by Laurie Godfrey. Patterson, an engineer by training, details why various machines and natural phenomena can cause local decreases in entropy. From these examples, Patterson explains why the theory of evolution does not contradict the Second Law of Thermodynamics, since evolution requires local increases in entropy that are brought about by naturally-occurring machines and phenomena. Ratzsch views Patterson as having missed the essential point of the creationist's argument - that the Second Law of Thermodynamics can be applied to the universe as a whole, and the universe as a close system cannot become more organized by itself. My problem with this is that even if the universe is a closed system and even if the total entropy of the universe cannot increase, surely local entropies can increase at the expense of other places in the universe. This is Patterson's point, and I think, at least in this case, Ratzsch was less than fair to Patterson. Having said this, Ratzsch has offerred us a fine work that should

A good read for both sides of the debate

This is an excellent examination of strawman arguments that are formulated by both sides of this debate. Given the nature of the subject-matter of the book, it is difficult to find any books at all that are truly objective. Darwinists will enter into the subject with presuppositions that their theory is correct and will many times ignore any evidence to the contrary. Creationists will many times believe in a literal reading of the book of Genesis and will reject the ideas of anyone who says otherwise. Both sides accuse the other of being closed minded and practicing bad science. To a degree, perhaps both are right. This book does about as good a job as one could ever (objectively) do to clear up some misunderstandings that both sides have in regards to the other. The reviewer from California has obviously made up his mind which side of the fence he has sat on, and that is fine. However, to merely say that there really is no debate at all & that the Darwinists have already won is, I think, a mistake. Anyone who is as closed minded as that need not read this book, for the whole point of the book is to take a disinterested look at the (many times fallacious)ideas of both sides. And if the argument is so clear cut as the Californian says, why is it that none other than the Harvard paleontologist Stephen J. Gould has written that "the extreme rarity of transitional forms in the fossil record" are the "trade secret of paleontology"? Darwin himself said that if there was even so much as one instance where transitional forms were not found, his theory would prove null and void. The great physicist Richard P. Feynman once said that the "core of science" is this: "When you find an exception to a rule, the rule is wrong." What is it that makes Darwinism exempt from this principle, I ask? Moreover, if Darwinism is so very straight forward, why do Gould and Niles Elderidge feel it necessary to resort to such an ad-hoc theory as punctuated equilibrium? Now, to be fair, the creationists for their part have used a multitude of logical fallacies and fudge factors over the years to make their idealogies "work." That is the point of Ratzche's book; to point out the flaws of each side. All that I am saying is that reading this book with a closed mind (either way) would be a waste of time. Reading this book thoughtfully would be time well spent.

The best book on the subject of creation vs. evolution?

Del Ratzch has written a book called, "The battle of beginnings: why niether side is winning the creation-evolution debate." This is one of the best and most objective books I have seen on the creation vs. evolution debate (including books from BOTH sides). I strongly recommend this book to be read before one wishes to criticize creationism or evolution. In it, he writes about misconceptions of what people have about both theories (they are tragically common even in science textbooks and seriously inhibit real progress) and refutes some popular arguments both sides have of accusing that their opponents' theories do not qualify as genuine science. I give it 5 stars relative to other books I have seen on this issue.

Ideology or Science?

Christianity Today Book Awards chose this as the number seven book of the year for 1997. The book's goal is to expose the philosophical fallacies in the arguments of both creationists and evolutionists in their criticisms of each other. The author himself avoids taking a position for either side, saying "I do not pretend to know which is correct" (p. 12) or "what the proper resolution to the creation-evolution dispute is" (p. 8). Rather, he seeks to show that many of the "arguments from both sides against the other fail because they are themselves defective or because no one holds the views against which they are directed" (p. 12). As Ratzsch shows, both camps spend enormous amounts of time attacking positions that no one actually holds and that have never been a part of Darwinian theory or creationist theory. (Ratzsch is a professor of philosophy at Calvin College specializing in philosophy of science.) This book outlines popular creationists' misunderstandings of Darwin's theory, and evolutionists' misunderstandings of creationist theory. Many of the creationist criticisms of evolution are irrelevant because they are based on misunderstandings of that theory, and visa versa. Ratzsch argues, convincingly, that debaters in both camps simply do not understand the philosophy of science. Perhaps the main message, besides getting a good understanding of the fallacies in the arguments, is that one must do an awful lot of homework before one steps into the ring of debate on this topic. There are way too many people in both camps who engage in the arguments who simply don't know what they are talking about. One needs to understand the philosophy of science. Since few in either camp take the time to study that, we may be doomed to continue to listen to fallacious debates for a long time to come. This book will help lay people sitting in the audiences of those debates to at least smile as they hear the illogical arguments. (Thomas N. Headland)