Re: "Scientific" position on philosophical questions

Steve Clark (ssclark@facstaff.wisc.edu)
Tue, 13 Jul 1999 11:59:54 -0500

At 01:49 PM 7/5/99 GMT, David J. Tyler wrote:
>On Wed, 30 Jun 1999, Steve Clark wrote:
>
>> As Howard Van Till points out, design and fabrication are different things.
>> Mutation and natural selection represent fabrication and may or may not
>> reflect the action of a designer.
>
>Thanks for responding to my question: "where then can design be
>found?" The distinction between conceptualisation and fabrication is
>one I am very comfortable with. I hope I am not being dense in
>expecting the fabrication process to reflect something about the
>designer. That is the spirit behind my question. Perhaps it should
>be rephrased: "where can design be found in the choice of mutations
>and natural selection for effecting evolutionary change?"

It seems to me that the product that is created is more
interesting/important than the process of fabrication. It is very
plausible that a boring, impoverished, even "blunt" process of fabrication
could yield an outstanding product that , intuitively,does not seem
commensurate with the perceived blunt process by which it was made. What
does it matter if a "blunt instrument" resulted in the glorious Creation.
It follows that our limited preconception of how God SHOULD HAVE created
the cosmos may lead us astray in recognizing the reality of God's creative
majesty.

It seems to me that Scripture focuses on that part of God's character that
is revealed through the Creation (i.e., WHAT he created) rather than on
knowledge of God via HOW he created. Quite frankly, it doesn't matter at
all how elegant or impoverished the fabrication process may appear to us
mortals. In fact, if a "blunt instrument" resulted in the glorious
Creation, then our preconception of what is "blunt" vs elegant may be flawed.

>I am not saying that
>Darwinism completely excludes design - but that it can only be found
>a place at a very impoverished level. This may be OK for some, but
>my concern is for Christians who are seeking to build their lives and
>their thinking on Christ and biblical foundations. This is where
>there is a tension, as the Biblical emphasis on design involves
>intelligence, wisdom, craftsmanship and the like. The Darwinian
>tools, which some argue were God's tools to fabricate his design
>goals, appear to be an abdication of intelligence, wisdom and
>craftsmanship.

The impoverishment you see belies a strange human myopia through which we
presume to know how God would create. Your view here seems to be that an
omniscient, omnipotent, glorious God must create in what we somehow define
to befit our belief of a God sitting on a jeweled throne in the sky. But
the truth is that if God created life using evolutionary tools, it does not
change the glory of the creation or the majesty of God one iota.

My continuing point here, is that this issue has no relevance on the truth
or falsity of whether life arose via an evolutionary process. We can only
learn the truth about this through empirical investigation.

Cheers,

Steve