From: George Murphy (gmurphy@raex.com)
Date: Fri Oct 17 2003 - 20:40:12 EDT
Sarah Berel-Harrop wrote:
...................
> Second, this is a fair summary of Gould's views on contingency.
> This is best understood as almost polemics against hyper-
> selective accounts of evolution. The idea is that selection,
> drift, etc are occuring simultaneously and contingency also plays
> a role. That is - there are unpredictable historical factors
> - from a strictly naturalistic point of view. It is precisely
> Gould's views on contingency that cause some lay atheists to
> accuse Gould of "giving comfort to the enemy" in the sense of
> the possibility of _insert God here, in this one-time historical
> event_. In this sense, the quote is saying, not that God is
> not a factor, but that the "tape" does not follow a deterministic
> pattern. I am well aware you will reject evolution as a science
> because it is not deterministic...........................
Looking at it from another angle, what Gould said about contingency in evolution
has some resemblance to the Christian understanding of election. Gould's point - e.g.,
in _Wonderful Life_ - is not just that evolution could have happened differently but
that it is not a matter of survival of inherently superior species. Tyhere is no
biological "manifest destiny." The species that survived the Cambrian were not "better"
than the strange creatures of the Burgess Shale that became extinct. Cf. Dt.7:7-8:
"It was not because you were more numerous than any other people that the LORD
set his heart on you and chose you - for you were the fewest of all peoples. It
was because the LORD loved you and kept the oath that he swore to your
ancestors, that the LORD has brought you out with a mighty hand, and redeemed
you from the house of slavery, from the hand of Pharaoh king of Egypt."
Shalom,
George
George L. Murphy
gmurphy@raex.com
http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Oct 17 2003 - 20:43:14 EDT