At 11:17 PM 07/18/2000 -0400, Steven P Crawford wrote:
>I was reading a book today entitled Darwinism Defeated? which featured a
>written debate between Phillip Johnson and Denis Lamoureaux (sp?).
>Johnson held to his usual position, except for a few comments that seemed
>to indicate he was vacillating from some of his ideas written in the
>early 90's. In contrast, Lamoreaux holds to a "teleological evolution"
>aka "evolutionary creationist" position, which seems to be nothing more
>than a new name given to an old idea (theistic evolution).
>
>A big point of tension in the debate was whether or not the idea of
>evolution, in and of itself, is anti-God and anti-theistic. Johnson's
>thesis was that the whole evolutionary hypothesis is automatically and
>inherently atheistic. To hold to evolution is to give up on God or at
>least relegate Him to the sideline or the backstage, turning Him into a
>deistical being. Lamoureaux vigorously challenged this assertion. He
>claimed that, while some scientists have believed this (e.g. Richard
>Dawkins), it is not a logical necessity for evolution to have any
>metaphysical implications one way or the other. It is strictly a
>physical theory of origins, and anyone who tries to extend it to the
>moral, spiritual, social, etc., realms is making a philosophical leap of
>logic. This would include Johnson.
>
>I found Lamoureaux's statements to this effect to be fascinating and
>provocative. This is such a new notion to my thinking that I'm wondering
>if it's a commonly held concept. I would appreciate anyone's critique of
>the idea that evolution -- in and of itself -- carries no necessary
>metaphysical claims either for or against God.
I have written many times on this forum in support of this point. I fully
agree with Denis that the metaphysical baggage that Dawkins or Johnson want
to associate with evolution science is not necessary. The science of
evolution does not inform us as to which view of the creation is
correct. In fact, the science is fully compatible with either a theistic
viewpoint or a materialistic/atheistic viewpoint. Basically, it is very
difficult to prove metaphysical paradigms with physical data. I like to
say that we need to keep our metaphysics and physics in their proper
epistemological places.
Cheers,
Steven S. Clark, Ph.D.
Associate Professor of Human Oncology and
Member, UW Comprehensive Cancer Center
University of Wisconsin School of Medicine
600 Highland Ave, K4/432
Madison, WI 53792
Office: (608) 263-9137
FAX: (608) 263-4226
ssclark@facstaff.wisc.edu
http://www.humonc.wisc.edu/clark/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jul 19 2000 - 11:30:59 EDT