My own view, repeated in virtually all of my essays, is that the sense of skepticism engendered by the sciences would be far more appropriately directed toward the sciences than toward anything else. It is not a view that has engendered wide-spread approval. The sciences require no criticism, many scientists say, because the sciences comprise a uniquely self-critical institution, with questionable theories and theoreticians passing constantly before stern appellate review. Judgment is unrelenting. And impartial. Individual scientists may make mistakes, but like the Communist Party under Lenin, science is infallible because its judgments are collective. Critics are not only unwelcome, they are unneeded. The biologist Paul Gross has made himself the master of this attitude and invokes it on every conceivable occasion. Now no one doubts that scientists are sometimes critical of themselves. Among astrophysicists, backbiting often leads to backstabbing. The bloodletting that ensues is on occasion salutary. But the process of peer review by which grants are funded and papers assigned to scientific journals, is, by its very nature, an undertaking in which a court reviews its own decisions and generally finds them good. It serves the useful purpose of settling various scores, but it does not -- and it cannot -- achieve the ends that criticism is intended to serve. If the scientific critic finds himself needed wherever he goes, like a hanging judge he finds himself unwelcome wherever he appears, all the more reason, it seems to me, that he really should get around as much as possible.

Amazon.com Sales Rank: #729 in Books (See Bestsellers in Books) Popular in these categories: (What's this?) #1 in Books > Religion & Spirituality > Religious Studies > Science & Religion #2 in Books > Religion & Spirituality > Spirituality > Atheism #2 in Books > Religion & Spirituality > Christianity > Theology > Philosophy

"In the U.S. you have the separation of powers that keeps different branches in check, but this is not true for science, where there is now a lot of corruption," he observed. "Science needs its own critics. The same skepticism that is used in research now needs to be turned back onto science itself."

But there is nothing wrong in principle with scientific endeavors that are infused by faith and a sense of humility toward larger possibilities, Berlinsk said. "We are not going to adopt sharia law because an astronomer who is open to these ideas begins to make important discoveries," he observed.

"Berlinski is to science writing what Tiger Woods is to golf. He can score from anywhere, against any opponent, on any course. The Deniable Darwin is a compulsive revel of his incandescent prose and jugular polemics. As irresistible as Gödel's Proof." --George Gilder, author of The Israel Test, Wealth and Poverty, and Telecosm "Berlinski's ability to weave the lessons of history with the wonders of modern science is unmatched, as is his use of subtle humor that enlivens his text. These essays will delight many and annoy others, regardless of on which side of the ideological aisle of science you may stand--for science has an ideology as Berlinski so well documents." --Gerald Schroeder, author of God According to God: A Physicist Proves We've Been Wrong About God All Along and The Science of God "Berlinski is a genuine intellectual hero, one whose challenge to the certainties of evolutionary biology and Big Bang cosmology--the comfortable certainties of conventional wisdom about the origin of man and the origin of the universe--does not come from allegiance to rival certainties such as biblical creationism. Instead, Berlinski turns the methods and assumptions of science on itself to demonstrate the implausibilities underlying the arrogant claims of the grand theorists." --Ron Rosenbaum, author of Explaining Hitler and The Shakespeare Wars "Berlinksi's rapier wit is the antidote to the insufferable smugness of modern scientism. When, without any seeming effort, he notes that 'like the Communist Party under Lenin, science is infallible because its judgments are collective,' the reader is forever immunized against grandiose claims for scientific 'consensus.' Much more awaits the readers of this wonderful collection." --Michael Behe, professor of biochemistry, Lehigh University, and author of The Edge of Evolution and Darwin's Black Box

Ever since Darwin's theory of evolution came out 150 years ago, there has been controversy over the issue -- and the critics remain to this day. Dr. David Berlinski is one of them. The mathematician and author is perhaps best known for his appearance in the movie Expelled about the controversy over intelligent design as an alternative to evolution.

David Berlinski Interviewed by Greg Koukl Yesterday, David Berlinski was interviewed on KBRT radio by Greg Koukl of Stand To Reason. This is one of the best interviews with David I've ever heard. Greg is extremely sharp and articulate, and really knows his stuff concerning ID. You can stream the MP3 here. The Berlinski interview begins at 1:52:05.