The Arches and the Spandrels A Response to Kenneth W. Kemp

• Published in: Forum philosophicum (Kraków, Poland) Vol. 30; no. 1
• Main Author: Chaberek, Michał
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: 25.06.2025
• ISSN: 1426-1898; 2353-7043
• DOI: 10.35765/forphil.2025.3001.13

In his book „The Edge of Evolution”, Michael Behe draws on a metaphor of arches and spandrels. The arches are what holds a cathedral together and spandrels are the “fillings” that may carry beautiful ornaments, however, they have no say in whether a building stands or collapses (Behe 2007, 171-203). Behe explains that it is similar with life – some minor and non-substantial elements of living organisms can be explained by neo-Darwinism, but the complex biochemical systems, which are essential for survivability of any living organism – cannot. Thus neo-Darwinism may explain the spandrels, but not the arches of life. I think Behe’s metaphor can be taken more broadly and applied to the context of our debate. Here I will understand it as a mental attitude by which one focuses on the irrelevant spandrels at the same time pretending to be unable to grasp the arch (“core” or “essence”) of a problem. In his response Mr. Kemp reduces my critique to four points (P1-P4) which he claims we disagree on and shows why – on his view – I am mistaken. Here I will order my response according to his four points.