I am reading Darwin’s Black Box by Michael J. Behe this week. It’s been a fascinating read thus far. Behe’s key point, thus far into the book, is not so much an objection to evolution per se (he makes it clear that evolution does work at a micro [adaptation] level). What he questions is Darwinian evolution’s ability to explain how complex systems came into being. He lays down the gauntlet by arguing that many complex systems (blood clotting, for example) are irreducibly complex and thus cannot be the direct result of evolution. Similarly, a round-about approach to evolving such systems fails to meet the needs of minimum functionality. That’s a very high-level summary intended only to whet your appetite.

I have heard that there is a counter-argument to Behe’s Irreducible Complexity argument. I assume it has been advanced by Richard Dawkins and I would love to find out more about it. Behe makes it clear that he respects Richard Dawkins for his intellect, his passion, and his capacity for explaining complext topics in a light style. I have to confess that I have looked on Dawkins with some disdain, but Behe has influenced me. While I still disagree with Dawkins, I am certainly willing to read and consider his opinions on evolution. Behe has also written a follow up, The Edge of Evolution, to address these counter-arguments. This will be my next read, after looking into Dawkins’ objections.