Fuller’s Intelligent Design

  • Francis X Remedios
  • Val Dusek


This chapter is Fuller’s version of Intelligent Design (ID) in opposition to evolutionary theorists, and the controversy concerning it is discussed. This chapter discusses why ID is important to Fuller in terms of defending the spiritual distinctiveness of humanity. He claims doing science is to participate in the mind of God, since humanity is created in the image and likeness of God. Fuller contrasts what he claims is the natural history approach of Darwin and evolutionists with molecular biology, claiming ID is linked to the latter. Fuller’s claims concerning the scientific status of evolutionary theory are criticized.


Intelligent Design Darwin 


  1. Behe, M. (2007). The Edge of Evolution: The Search for the Limits of Darwinism. Glencoe: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  2. Bonaventura, S. (1952). The Mind’s Road to God. Indianapolis: Liberal Arts Press.Google Scholar
  3. Cartwright, N. (1983). How the Laws of Physics Lie. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chamovitz, D. (2013). What a Plant Knows: A Guide to the Sense. New York: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux.Google Scholar
  5. Darwin, C. (2015). The Formation of Vegetable Mould Through the Action of Worms, with Observation of Their Habits. New York: Dossier Press. (Orig. 1882).Google Scholar
  6. Dusek, V. (1966b). The Hamiltonian Revolution in Physics.
  7. Dusek, V. (2000). Aristotle’s Four Causes and Contemporary ‘Newtonian’ Dynamics. In D. Sfendoni-Mentzou, J. N. Hattagiani, & D. Johnston (Eds.), Aristotle and Contemporary Science (pp. 81–93). New York: Peter Lang Publishers.Google Scholar
  8. Fuller, S. (1997). Science. Buckingham: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Fuller, S. (2000). Thomas Kuhn: A Philosophical History of Our Times. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Fuller, S. (2004). Kuhn vs. Popper: The Struggle for the Soul of Science. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Fuller, S. (2006a). Humanity as the Site of Ideological Conflict in the Twenty-First Century. Ludus Vitalis, 14(26), 227–231.Google Scholar
  12. Fuller, S. (2006b). The New Sociological Imagination. London: Sage Publications, Ltd.Google Scholar
  13. Fuller, S. (2006c). The Philosophy of Science and Technology Studies. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  14. Fuller, S. (2007a). New Frontiers in Science and Technology Studies. New York: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  15. Fuller, S. (2007b). Science vs. Religion: Intelligent Design and the Problem of Evolution. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  16. Fuller, S. (2008). Dissent over Descent: Intelligent Design’s Challenge to Darwinism. Cambridge: Icon Books.Google Scholar
  17. Fuller, S. (2009). The Sociology of Intellectual Life. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  18. Fuller, S. (2010). Science. Durham: Acumen Publishing Limited.Google Scholar
  19. Fuller, S. (2011a). Humanity 2.0: What It Means to Be Human Past, Present and Future. London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Fuller, S. (2011b). The Posthuman Challenge to Ecological Correctness.
  21. Fuller, S. (2011c). Evidence, What Evidence? Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 41(4), 567–573.Google Scholar
  22. Fuller, S. (2014a). Knowledge: The Philosophical Quest in History. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  23. Fuller, S. (2014b). Social Epistemology: The Future of an Unfulfilled Promise. Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective, 3(7), 29–37.
  24. Fuller, S. (2014c). Keynote Lecture: Russian ‘Cosmism’ as a Potential Inspiration for Twenty-First Century Interdisciplinary Work.
  25. Fuller, S. (2014d). Towards a Proactionary Welfare State. Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective, 3(5), 82–84.
  26. Fuller, S. (2015). Retrieved January 28, 2017 from
  27. Fuller, S., & Collier, J. (2004). Philosophy, Rhetoric, and the End of Knowledge: A New Beginning for Science and Technology Studies (2nd ed.). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publisher.Google Scholar
  28. Gould, S. J. (1983). A Worm for the Century. In Hen’s Teeth and Horse’s Toes (pp. 120–133). New York: Norton.Google Scholar
  29. Gould, S. J., Raup, D. M., Sepkoski, J., & Schopf, J. M. (1977). The Shape of Evolution: a Comparison of Real and Random Clades. Paleobiology, 3(1), 23–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Grayling, A. C. (2008, September). Origin of the Specious. The New Humanist.
  31. Hull, D. (1988). Science as Process: An Evolutionary Account of the Social Development of Science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Jonas, H. (1967). Judaism, Christianity and the Western Tradition. Commentary, (41), 61–70.
  33. Kitcher, P. (2007). Living with Darwin. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Kitzmiller, T. (2005). The Middle District of Pennsylvania: Tammy Kitzmiller, et al.: Case No. 04cv2688 Plaintiffs : Judge Jones v. Dover Area School District, Tammy Kitzmiller, et al. v. Dover Area School District, et al. (400 F. Supp. 2d 707, Docket no. 4cv2688).Google Scholar
  35. Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  36. Levi-Leblond, J.-M. (1975). Ideology of/in Contemporary Physics. In S. Rose & H. Rose (Eds.), The Radicalization of Science (pp. 136–175). London: The Macmillan Press.Google Scholar
  37. Lloyd, E. A. (1994). The Structure and Confirmation of Evolutionary Theory. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  38. Lucretius Titus Carus. (2008). [94 BCE] De Rerum Natura: On the Nature of Things (trans. Slavitt, D.). Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  39. Lynch, W. (2016). Social Epistemology Transformed: Steve Fuller’s Account of Knowledge as a Divine Spark for Human Domination. Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective.
  40. McHale, D. (1985). George Boole: His Life and Work. Dublin: Boole Press, Ltd.Google Scholar
  41. Mesthene, I. (1967). Technology and Wisdom. In I. Mesthene (Ed.), Technology and Social Change (pp. 109–115). Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill.Google Scholar
  42. Raup, D., & Gould, S. J. (1974). Stochastic Simulation and Evolution: Toward a Nomothetic Paleontology. Systematic Zoology, 23(3), 305–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Rifkin, J. (1983). Algeny. New York: Viking Press.Google Scholar
  44. Schroedinger, E. (1944). What Is Life? The Physical Aspect of the Living Cell. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  45. Schweber, S. (1982). Demons, Angels, and Probability: Some Aspects of British Science in the Nineteenth Century. In A. Shimony & H. Feshbach (Eds.), Physics as Natural Philosophy: Essays in Honor of Laszlo Tisza (pp. 319–363). Cambridge: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  46. Segerstrale, U. (2000). Defenders of the Truth, the Battle for Science in the Sociology Debate and Beyond. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  47. Sivin, N. (1995). On the Limits of Empirical Knowledge in the Traditional Chinese Science. In Science in Ancient China: Researches and Reflections. Brookfield: Variorum.Google Scholar
  48. Snyder, L. J. (2011). The Philosophical Breakfast Club: Four Remarkable Friends Who Transformed Science and Changed the World. New York: Broadway Books.Google Scholar
  49. Toulmin, S. (1963). Foresight and Understanding. New York: Harper Torchbooks.Google Scholar
  50. Truesdell, C. (Ed.). (1960). The Rational Mechanics of Flexible or Elastic Bodies 1688–1788. Leonardi Euleri. Opera Omnia. XI, Part 2, 288.Google Scholar
  51. Van Fraassen, B. (1991). Quantum Mechanics: An Empricist View. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Weinberg, S. (2007). Facing Up: Science and Its Cultural Adversaries. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  53. White, L. (1967). The Historical Roots of Our Ecological Crisis. Science, 155(3767), 1203–1207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Wiener, N. (1964). God and Golem Incorporated. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Francis X Remedios
    • 1
  • Val Dusek
    • 2
  1. 1.EdmontonCanada
  2. 2.University of New HampshireDurhamUSA

Personalised recommendations