Re: [asa] Edward O. Wilson shares Dawkins' basic views?

On 9/27/06, Janice Matchett <janmatch@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> At 05:13 PM 9/5/2006, George Murphy wrote:
>
> "..... I think that the appeal he makes is reasonable. ...as Wilson
> notes, the opposition to *sound* environmental policy from some on the
> religious right continues to be a problem - & that's especially the
> case
> since some people with those views are in positions to influence or
> make
> policy in the current administration. ~ Shalom George
>
>
> *@* Can an *unsound/muddled* "thinker" be thought able to make
> "reasonable" appeals --- except by one who has also denied the law of
> non-contradiction? :)
>

Yes, because no one is utterly sound or utterly unsound. An unsound
thinker
can be right and sound one wrong. (This comes as a consequence of the
law of
non-contradiction that there is absolute truth that is independent of
the
quality of our reasoning.)

Wilson is correct in that his scientism worldview is incompatible
with the
Christian one. Wilson also correctly notes that sound environmental
policy can be compatible with the Christain worldview. If you listen
to the
interview of Wilson on Science Friday you will note that Wilson is not
trying to convert Christians to his worldview. In fact, his evangelical
childhood has bred respect even though he disagrees at a very deep
level.
For Wilson, his concern for the Creation trumps his secularism.
Wilson put
it this way in his book:

> "Does this difference in worldview separate us in all things?"
>
> "It does not. ... Let us see, then, if we can, and you are
> willing, to
> meet on the near side of metaphysics in order to deal with the real
> world=
  we
> share."
>

Former Bush speechwriter, Matthew Scully, noted -- to quote Francis
Schaeffer -- the borrowed capital that Wilson uses when he comes to his
moral judgements:

> In his own defense, however, the pastor might reasonably wonder
> just how
> Wilson managed to wring all of these praiseworthy moral sentiments
> from
> evolutionary biology. The "universal values," sense of "honor" and
> "inbor=
n
> sense of decency" to which Wilson appeals are of no traceable
> origin in t=
he
> blindly amoral operations of natural selection. And grandiose
> attempts to
> explain conscience and reason in purely biological and material
> terms sti=
ll
> leave us with little in the way of moral guidance =97 without a firm
> obligation to care for the earth and for our fellow creatures. It
> may be,
> the good pastor could reply, that Judeo-Christian thought itself is
> a kin=
d
> of moral biosphere from which this and all good causes continue to
> draw,
> with or without acknowledgment, and that more deference is due from
> scientists on that account alone.
>
> Such minor quarrels aside, "The Creation" is the wise and lovely
> work of =
a
> truly learned man, filled with a spirit that readers of every
> stripe will
> recognize as reverence.
>
It is Wilson's childhood that allows him to recognize the Christian
basis
for sound environmental policy and despite his muddled thinking the
truth
still gets through. In the end, Wilson asks us not to adopt his
worldview
but to be true to our own. That is a reasonable request and I contend
the
following should guide our response.

38"Teacher," said John, "we saw a man driving out demons in your name
and we
told him to stop, because he was not one of us."

  39"Do not stop him," Jesus said. "No one who does a miracle in my
name can
in the next moment say anything bad about me, 40for whoever is not
against
us is for us. 41I tell you the truth, anyone who gives you a cup of
water in
my name because you belong to Christ will certainly not lose his reward.
-- Mark 9:38-41

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Thu Oct 5 22:49:14 2006