Open main menu

Wikipedia β

Michael Ruse, FRSC (born 21 June 1940) is a philosopher of science who specializes in the philosophy of biology and is well known for his work on the relationship between science and religion, the creation–evolution controversy, and the demarcation problem within science. Ruse currently teaches at Florida State University.

Michael Escott Ruse
Born (1940-06-21) 21 June 1940 (age 77)
Birmingham, England
Institutions Florida State University (2000–present)
University of Guelph (1965–2000)
Main interests
Philosophy of biology
Philosophy of science



Ruse was born in England, attending Bootham School, York.[1] He took his undergraduate degree at the University of Bristol (1962), his master's degree at McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario (1964), and Ph.D. at the University of Bristol (1970).

Ruse taught at the University of Guelph in Ontario, Canada for 35 years. Since his retirement from Guelph, he has taught at Florida State University and is the Lucyle T. Werkmeister Professor of Philosophy (2000–present). In 1986, he was elected as a Fellow of both the Royal Society of Canada and the American Association for the Advancement of Science. He has received honorary doctorates from the University of Bergen, Norway (1990), McMaster University, Ontario, Canada (2003) and the University of New Brunswick, Fredericton, New Brunswick, Canada (2007). In September 2014 he was made an Honorary Doctor of Science by University College London.

Ruse was a key witness for the plaintiff in the 1981 test case (McLean v. Arkansas) of the state law permitting the teaching of "creation science" in the Arkansas school system.[2] The federal judge ruled that the state law was unconstitutional.

Ruse delivered some of the 2001 Gifford Lectures in Natural Theology at the University of Glasgow. His lectures on Evolutionary Naturalism, "A Darwinian Understanding of Epistemology" and "A Darwinian Understanding of Ethics," are collected in The Nature and Limits of Human Understanding (ed. Anthony Sanford, T & T Clark, 2003). Ruse debates regularly with William A. Dembski, a proponent of intelligent design.[3] Ruse takes the position that it is possible to reconcile the Christian faith with evolutionary theory.[4] Ruse founded the journal Biology and Philosophy, of which he is now Emeritus Editor,[5] and has published numerous books and articles. He cites the influence of his late colleague Ernan McMullin.[6]

Ruse has sought to reconcile science and religion, a position which has brought him into conflict with Richard Dawkins and Pharyngula science blogger PZ Myers.[7][8] Ruse has made several criticisms of prominent figures labeled in the public sphere as new atheists.[8][9] For example, according to Ruse, new atheists do the side of science a "grave disservice", a "disservice to scholarship." Ruse stated that Dawkins would fail "any introductory philosophy or religion course",[8][9] that The God Delusion makes him "ashamed to be an atheist", and that new atheism was "a bloody disaster".[8][9]

Personal lifeEdit

Ruse has two children from his first marriage, and has been married to his second wife since 1985, with whom he has three children. Ruse is an atheist.

Selected worksEdit


  1. ^ Bootham School Register. York, England: Bootham Old Scholars Association. 2011. 
  2. ^ "Testimony of Dr. Michael Ruse". 1981. Retrieved 14 September 2010. 
  3. ^ Stewart, R.B. (2007). Intelligent Design: William A. Dembski & Michael Ruse in Dialogue. New York: Fortress Press. 
  4. ^ Ruse, Michael (2000). Can a Darwinian be a Christian?. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 
  5. ^ "Editorial Board". Biology and Philosophy. Springer Netherlands. ISSN 0169-3867. 
  6. ^ Ruse, Michael. "SCIENCE AND VALUES: MY DEBT TO ERNAN McMULLIN". Zygon. 47: 666–685. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9744.2012.01287.x. 
  7. ^ Ruse, Michael (2 June 2010). "A Scientific Defense of the Templeton Foundation". Huffington Post. Retrieved 14 November 2014. 
  8. ^ a b c d Ruse, Michael (August 2009). "Why I Think the New Atheists are a Bloody Disaster". Beliefnet. The BioLogos Foundation as a columnist of Beliefnet. Retrieved 19 August 2015. … the new atheists do the side of science a grave disservice … these people do a disservice to scholarship ... Richard Dawkins in The God Delusion would fail any introductory philosophy or religion course. Proudly he criticizes that whereof he knows nothing … the poor quality of the argumentation in Dawkins, Dennett, Hitchens, and all of the others in that group … the new atheists are doing terrible political damage to the cause of Creationism fighting. Americans are religious people ... They want to be science-friendly, although it is certainly true that many have been seduced by the Creationists. We evolutionists have got to speak to these people. We have got to show them that Darwinism is their friend not their enemy We have got to get them onside when it comes to science in the classroom. And criticizing good men like Francis Collins, accusing them of fanaticism, is just not going to do the job. Nor is criticizing everyone, like me, who wants to build a bridge to believers – not accepting the beliefs, but willing to respect someone who does have them … The God Delusion makes me ashamed to be an atheist … They are a bloody disaster … 
  9. ^ a b c Dougherty, T; Gage, LP (2015). "4/ New Atheist Approaches to Religion, pp. 51-62". In Oppy, Graham. The Routledge Handbook of Contemporary Philosophy of Religion. Oxon and New York: Routledge. pp. 52–53. ISBN 9781844658312. Michael Ruse (2009) claimed that Dawkins would fail 'any philosophy or religion course'; and for this reason Ruse says The God Delusion made him 'ashamed to be an atheist' 

External linksEdit