Behe’s Continues to Ignore His Strongest Philosophical Critic

Behe’s Continues to Ignore His Strongest Philosophical Critic October 27, 2016

The blog Evolution News & Views just re-published a long essay written by Michael Behe in 2000 in which he responds to the philosophical objections of his critics. It’s unfortunate, however, that Behe has never acknowledged his strongest philosophical critic, Purdue University philosopher Paul Draper. In 2002, Draper wrote a critique of Behe’s book, Darwin’s Black Box, in the journal Faith and Philosophy. (Click here for a link to the paper’s record at PhilPapers.org.) Draper’s paper did manage to convince Alvin Plantinga that Behe’s argument is at best incomplete (and definitely does not establish the falsity of Darwinian gradualism–which was Behe’s main target). Given Plantinga’s strong initial inclination to agree with Behe, this was no small accomplishment by Draper.

Although the actual copy of Draper’s paper is behind a paywall, Ex-Apologist wrote an excellent and detailed synopsis here.

Note: an earlier version of this blog post missed the fact that Behe’s essay was written in 2000 and treated the publication on Evolution News & Views as if it were a new essay. I regret the error. JJL

"I think we can accept that all circular reasoning is bad reasoning, but leave open ..."

Response to Dr. Jacobus Erasmus on ..."
"Good question. Mostly because I can at least understand it.So if your question is a ..."

Response to Dr. Jacobus Erasmus on ..."
"Am I the only sensing a red flag when I read the term "viciously circular"? ..."

Response to Dr. Jacobus Erasmus on ..."
"Dr. Erasmus excerpted a bit from Christof Koch, a prominent neurophysicist who was poached from ..."

Response to Dr. Jacobus Erasmus on ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


TRENDING AT PATHEOS Nonreligious
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment