"We are not inferring design to account for a black box, but to account for an open box"
About this Quote
Behe’s line is engineered to flip a familiar accusation on its head: that intelligent design is a lazy “God of the gaps” move, smuggling purpose into whatever science hasn’t cracked yet. By insisting the box is open, he’s claiming the opposite posture - not retreating into ignorance, but leaning on inspection. The rhetoric is shrewd because it rebrands design as a conclusion drawn from visibility rather than mystery: you can see the parts, you can see the interactions, and that very clarity, he implies, is what forces the design inference.
The subtext is a courtroom strategy disguised as a lab note. “Black box” evokes hidden mechanisms and, culturally, the fear of unverifiable reasoning. “Open box” signals transparency, testability, and a kind of mechanical commonsense: if you can inventory components and still can’t imagine a stepwise path, then design becomes the most reasonable explanation. Behe isn’t just defending a thesis; he’s defending intellectual respectability, positioning his camp as empirical and the critics as stuck on an outdated caricature.
Context matters because Behe’s signature argument - irreducible complexity - lives or dies on what counts as an adequate evolutionary account. Critics argue the box is “open” only in the sense that we can see current machinery, not its historical assembly; missing evolutionary pathways are not the same as evidence of intention. That’s why the quote works: it compresses a sprawling dispute about inference, burden of proof, and scientific method into a simple image that sounds like plain realism, even as it quietly shifts the standards of explanation.
The subtext is a courtroom strategy disguised as a lab note. “Black box” evokes hidden mechanisms and, culturally, the fear of unverifiable reasoning. “Open box” signals transparency, testability, and a kind of mechanical commonsense: if you can inventory components and still can’t imagine a stepwise path, then design becomes the most reasonable explanation. Behe isn’t just defending a thesis; he’s defending intellectual respectability, positioning his camp as empirical and the critics as stuck on an outdated caricature.
Context matters because Behe’s signature argument - irreducible complexity - lives or dies on what counts as an adequate evolutionary account. Critics argue the box is “open” only in the sense that we can see current machinery, not its historical assembly; missing evolutionary pathways are not the same as evidence of intention. That’s why the quote works: it compresses a sprawling dispute about inference, burden of proof, and scientific method into a simple image that sounds like plain realism, even as it quietly shifts the standards of explanation.
Quote Details
| Topic | Science |
|---|
More Quotes by Michael
Add to List
