Institute for InterGroup Understanding reviews Evolution 2.0

George Halvorson, founder of the Institute for InterGroup Understanding, reviewed Evolution 2.0.

He writes:

“I had the opportunity to function as the CEO of a small hospital system and then a larger hospital system. We did some things in those settings to make care better and safer for patients.

That was an extremely useful learning experience.

As a believer in classic Darwinism, I saw how hard it was for us to engineer a lower sepsis death rate in our hospitals in an approach that involved changing multiple processes at multiple levels and when I looked at the world all around us, I realized that there were too many inter related and connected things actually happening in the world around us that could not possibly have been created by the slow sieve and the clunky evolution process differentiation tool of relative survival rates for each mutation that anchors Darwinian change.

I learned from doing process improvement to save lives in hospitals that it takes extreme intentionality and deliberate design elements to simultaneously link multiple elements of process and care to achieve better patient outcomes in those settings.

My life experience in getting real things to inter relate in real world functional settings made me a skeptic relative to classic Darwinism.

Perry Marshall took that learning about processes one step further and added information about the tool kit for change. Marshall is also a practitioner in his own world and he knew something that I did not know. He actually knew how to operationally use a computer and he knows as a practitioner what actual computer code does and does not do in the real world.

His book shares that learning with us all. We are in his debt for adding that layer of insight into actual computer process functioning to our understanding level of evolution.

He discerned and believed and showed us that DNA was a code and that it had the same rules that other codes have for functioning.

He also realized and taught us that it was a magnificent, explicit, highly effective, and very functional code — not something that was somehow created spontaneously from a fortuitous mixture of energy and material in some circumstantial settings. He saw elegant design elements in that DNA code that he recognized from having built them himself for modern computers.


“Anyone who continues to believe today with full confidence in the pure Darwinian theory of evolution that each of those nuances and each of those component parts in DNA design was somehow spontaneously developed by mutations and then each included in the genome based on pure survival of the fittest screening and selection processes should not be entirely critical of other people who also have leaps of faith undergirding their own belief systems.”

Read George’s full review here.

Download The First 3 Chapters of Evolution 2.0 For Free, Here –

Where Did Life And The Genetic Code Come From? Can The Answer Build Superior AI? The #1 Mystery In Science Now Has A $10 Million Prize. Learn More About It, Here –

3 Responses

  1. Mark Chenoweth says:


    Thanks for getting me started on the EES path. My article combining EES themes and the theology of St. Maximus the Confessor has finally been published by the St. Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly.

    Sy Garte read a draft and approved of it before publication as did Wynand DeBeer. Thought you might find it of interest.

    • What a great paper. Thank you for making it so easy to read and free of theological jargon.

      It amplifies especially towards the end a lot of thoughts I’ve had about the incarnation relative to biology as a whole. Nice work.

  2. A few million years might have helped. But reproduction and not survival seems to be the one differentiating capstone of ‘classical Darwinism.’

Leave a Reply

You must use your real first and last name. Anonymity is not allowed.
Your email address will not be published.
Required fields are marked *