Product Description

Can someone who accepts Darwin's theory of natural selection subscribe at the same time to the basic tenets of Christianity? Adopting a balanced perspective on the subject, Michael Ruse argues that, although it is at times difficult for a Darwinian to embrace Christian belief, it is not inconceivable. Ruse has produced an important contribution to a sometimes overheated debate for anyone interested in seeking an informed and judicious guide to these issues. Michael Ruse is professor of philosophy and zoology at the University of Guelph in Ontario, Canada. He is the author of many books on evolutionary biology. In addition, he has published several hundred articles and many book reviews. He is the editor of the Cambridge Series in the Philosophy of Biology and founding editor of the journal IBiology & Philosophy. Hb ISBN (2000): 0-521-63144-0

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #609621 in Books
• Published on: 2004-09-06
• Original language: English
• Number of items: 1
• Binding: Paperback
• 254 pages

Amazon.com Review
You'll have to look hard to find a better explanation of the relationship between basic Christian tenets and the Darwinian theory of evolution than Can a Darwinian Be a Christian? by Michael Ruse. The author, a professor of philosophy and zoology at the University of Guelph in Ontario, Canada, writes with bracing candor ("Let me be open," he begins. "I think that evolution is a fact and that Darwinism rules triumphant.") and sophisticated sympathy to Christian doctrine ("if one's understanding of Darwinism does include a natural evolution of life from nonlife, there is no reason to think that this now makes Christian belief impossible."). Writing this book, he also clearly had a hell of a lot of fun (disarming skeptical Christian readers at the beginning, he asks, "Why should the devil have all the good tunes?"). Can a Darwinian Be a Christian? answers its title question with heady confidence--"Absolutely!"--but the book journeys towards that answer with circumspect integrity. Covering territory from the Scopes "Monkey Trial" to contemporary theories of social Darwinism to the question of extraterrestrial life, Ruse applies an impressive wealth of knowledge that encompasses many disciplines. Readers may or may not be swayed, but they can't help but be challenged and edified by this excellent book. --Michael Joseph Gross

From Library Journal
For those dissatisfied with the tenor of the evolution vs. creationism debate, or who simply long for a more moderate intellectual engagement, Ruse (philosophy and zoology, Univ. of Guelph, Canada; Mystery of Mysteries) offers another perspective here: one designed to help rationalists come to terms with religion. Written from the viewpoint of a scientist willing to engage Christian literalism on its own terms, he systematically compares historical Darwinism and Christian beliefs and sensibilities, finding surprising parallels in both methodologies as they search for the meaning of life. While the author can be faulted in spots for minor misinformation (Augustine was not raised a Christian but underwent a conversion in midlife), he succeeds in offering as basic and thoroughgoing an engagement of biology and belief as one might hope for. And his honesty is noteworthyDa Darwinian can be a Christian, but, as Ruse notes, nobody claims that that's an easy path. Recommended for public and academic libraries.DSandra Collins, Duquesne Univ. Lib., PA
Copyright 2000 Reed Business Information, Inc.

From Booklist
Ever since Thomas Henry Huxley tangled with the Anglican bishop of Oxford, evolutionists and Christians have been at one another's throats. Ruse thinks it's time for these antagonists to stop attacking each other's beliefs and to start comparing them. Once evolutionary theory has been stripped of antireligious polemics, and Christian orthodoxy of scriptural literalism, the two perspectives coincide at important points. The Darwinian account of how human selfishness wars against human altruism, for example, resonates with Augustinian teachings on original sin and Christian virtue. And many Darwinians share with Christians a conviction that humans stand apart from all other creatures in ways that reflect more than blind biological chance. To be sure, Ruse acknowledges the persistent tensions: evolutionary explanations of the mind, for instance, hardly reinforce faith in a divine origin for the soul, nor do sociobiological explanations of religion leave any place for an angelic metaphysics. Yet Ruse shows finally that rigorous Darwinians need not surrender their intellectual honesty to embrace Christianity, nor do devout Christians have to lapse into apostasy to accept Darwinian science. Balanced and scrupulous, this is an overdue book for turning a sterile debate into a meaningful dialogue. Bryce Christensen
Copyright © American Library Association. All rights reserved

Customer Reviews

A lively inquiry addressed squarely to the Darwinian
This is a serious, solid work by a Darwinian and philosopher. From the preface onward, it is clear that Ruse believes that something important -- the question of the title -- has been overlooked in the noisy debates on evolution and Christianity. In this book, Ruse develops a steady, evenhanded exposition of the central issues. He starts with overview of Darwinism and Christianity, and then moves on to address major points of contention, including origins, naturalism, design, pain, Social Darwinism, and even extraterrestrials (!), each in a separate chapter. In each case he presents the problems posed to Christianity by Darwinism, and possible resolutions that can be found within historical Christianity. Some of the issues, such as monogenism in the section on human origins, are particularly difficult, and may be irreconcilable for many readers. Other sections, such as the chapter on pain, make fascinating reading with or without a desire to span the gulf between Darwinism and Christianity.

This is a welcome contribution by a Darwinian who takes Christianity seriously.

Kudos for seriously addressing the subject
Michael Ruse deserves alot of credit for seriously tackling the subject of the compatibility of Darwinism and Christianity. He also deserves credit for understanding and acknowledging basic Christian beliefs, something that unfortunately cannot be said for some others, like Stephen Jay Gould, who have written on the intersection of science and religion.

Before reaching the substance of Ruse's work, we need to clear up some matters raised by other reviewers. Several young earth creationists have pointed out that the Bible teaches that death--not only human death but animal death, predation and bloodshed, as well--is a result of Adam's sin and the resulting fall of the human race. Rom. 5:12; 8:18-22, I Cor. 15:21-22. But if the fossiliferous strata are interpreted according to conventional uniformitarian geology, it proves that death has been around for millions of years before humans existed, and thus before the first human sin. This is a valid point, but we Bible-believing Christians need to realize that our problem on this point is with uniformitarian geology, (something I call Lyellism), not with evolution or Darwinism. Charles Lyell had already won the day for uniformitarian geology almost 30 years before the publication of Darwin's "Origin of the the Species." The men who agreed with Lyell that vast ages were needed to form the fossiliferous strata were creationists, many of them Anglican clergymen like Coneybeare and William Buckland. Thus, we cannot blame Darwin for theological problems created by uniformitarian geology (and I agree that there are many). Ruse only spends a couple of pages breifly discussing these developments in geology.

This book is addressed to the possible conflicts between Darwinism, with its teaching that humans evolved from lower primates, and Christianity, with its teaching that humans were created by God in God's own image. The central doctrine of Christianity is that Christ is the Son of God, and that Christ died to save fallen humanity. This is not a doctrine peculiar to any particular brand or branch of Christianity. All Christians believe that Christ died to save us; He is our Redeemer. How might this central doctrine conflict with Darwinism? Because it presupposes the need for a Redeemer. It presupposes that there was a fall, that man sinned and fell from grace, something that is taught in Genesis but denied by Darwinism. It seems to me that this is the central conflict between Darwinism and Christianity, and I think, after reading the relevant parts of this book, that Ruse would agree.

To my mind, Ruse gets alot of credit for recognizing that there is a real and substantial conflict here. "an essential component of Christian theology, . . . is that humans are descended from a unique pair (monogenism). That part of the Adam and Eve story cannot be interpreted symbolically. . . . the trouble is that this goes completely against our thinking about the nature of the evolutionary process. Successful species like humans do not pass through single-pair bottlenecks: there is certainly no evidence that this was true of Homo sapiens, a species which seems to have been well spread around the earth" (pp. 75-76). Ruse admits that "we seem to have reached an impasse." (p. 77).

Thus, by page 77, Ruse has spotted the problem. Although the book goes on to page 218, I don't think he ever came close to solving it. The general thrust of the book is that something like what has come to be known as "theistic evolution" is compatible with Christianity. "It is not by chance that the universe exists and it is not by chance that we exist within the universe." (p. 83) But is the idea that God guided the evolutionary process compatible with what Ruse calls "full-blooded Darwinism"? Doesn't evolution teach exactly that it is just by chance that we exist? Those readers familiar with the writings of Stephen Jay Gould, especially "Wonderful Life", know that he teaches that evolution need not have resulted in the human race. Indeed, it was just the luck of the draw that humans ever evolved. Ruse thrashes around on the horns of this dilemma for several pages, never mustering up the courage to say that Gould is just flat wrong. So what remains of "theistic evolution"? "The Christian would be foolish to think that Darwinism insists that humans are uniquely significant and bound to appear." (p. 91). Wow! Not much remains even of theistic evolution.

Ultimately, Ruse admits that there had to be a fall in order for Christianity to work. "In the course of evolution, there must have been a first moment of conscious moral choice. That is the point at which the 'fall of humanity' began and humans were estranged from that natural fellowship with God which should have been theirs, and from their natural ability to relate unselfishly to one another." (p. 205, quoting Ward) But, again, it is not compatible with Darwinism: "And the whole business of an original, unique Adam and Eve goes flatly against modern evolutionary biology. . . . Is one supposed to believe that the parents of Adam and Eve--for they will have had such in the evolutionary story, if not in Genesis-- were soulless or sinless or what? And what about their brothers and sisters, and the next generation of homo sapiens, most of whom were not descended from Adam and Eve?" (p. 209)

Ruse just never solves this basic contradiction. He never comes close. But I salute him for trying. If nothing else, the fact that a man as clever and well educated as Ruse could not solve the basic contradiction between Darwinism and Christianity confirmed for me what I already suspected: the contradiction is insoluble.

Highly recommended.
Despite what our Creation Scientist friends might say, Ruse's book is an excellent discussion of an _open_ question, i.e., whether or not Christianity and Darwinism are compatible. Of course, Darwinism _is_ incompatible with _Creationism_. (So much the worse for Creationism, since the evidence definitively proves the Creationist creation story false.) But, as Ruse clearly and even-handedly describes, there are lots of other versions of Christianity that admit a metaphorical reading of Genesis. The trick then is to try to reconcile the scientific facts about evolution with the key doctrines of Christianty, e.g., Original Sin and its transmission, doctrines which are required in order for a Saviour to be needed in the first place. Ruse takes his task seriously, clearly distinguishing true conflicts from merely apparent ones and sincerely attempting to come up with a consistent Darwinian Christianity. I'm not sure he completely succeeds. Even some moderate Christians will not recognize the resulting positions as Christian, and some non-Christians will no doubt see the sometimes-extreme contortions required as further evidence of the unreasonableness of Christian belief. Nevertheless, this is an important book that ought to be read by anyone interested in its particular focus or the general question of the relationship between science and religion. It is, moreover, clearly and engagingly written, and its honesty and forthrightness should serve as a model for this sort of debate.