9.24.2005
Evolution/Intelligent Design blah blah blah
I came across a critique on the Intelligent Design debate today and finished it feeling terribly disheartened. Having watched the conversation with much interest the past couple years, I'm left wondering if the biologist are right and we humans truly are descendants of chimpanzees. Humans, I believe, are capable of reasoned debate while chimpanzees shriek and fling feces at one another. I realize that is a harsh generalization, but I'm so tired of the bickering. I also realize that there is no easy solution to this big mess, but it would be nice if the more cordial and progressive voices in the arena could drown out the narrow-minded die hards or were given the proper representation they deserve.
I am not a scientist and I'm not even qualified to call myself a Christian, but the result of this debate is important to me. I want to know the truth. I want to know if I really am the product of some cosmic fluke. I want to know what was before the Big Bang and what's at the end of our accelerating universe. Or, if it was God who shaped me from the dust of the Earth, I want to know how. I want to know what He is made of and how He came to be. I want the Ultimate Knowledge.
When will we ever get past this partisan wrangling so we can get these questions answered? Is there no way to work together?
DATA OUTPUT: Jessi @ 11:23 AM
DATA INPUT = 6
6 Comments:
If we came from chimps, then why are the chimps still here?
The Big Bang and evolution seem to tie together nicely, that's why I mentioned it. I'm not calling for a union of faith and science but for more thoughtful voices to lead the debate.
The first man to propose that the universe began with an explosion was a Catholic priest. Georges Lemaitre. I read elsewhere that many in the scientific community dismissed his hypothesis as an attempt to bring Creationism to physics. Even Einstein did not endorse the idea at first.
Why do I mention this? Religion and science are not always incompatible. Those with faith could have something very big to offer in our never ending quest for the truth.
"If faith is applied to science then you have a fact based system relying on 'I read this in a book somewhere so we should not question it'. In that case, no further answers will be sought and science will stagnate into a bunch of mystics that nobody takes seriously."
A point I've heard come up following this same basic thought and specifically has it ties into current debates on briging intelligent design to the public school relm is what happens if the inteligent design people win?
Lesson 1, Day 1: Tell students that there may have been an inteligence outside of our own that created us and everything around us (approx. 1hr).
Lesson 2, day 2: recap on yesterdays lesson and then...uh...hmmm (approx. 5 min).
Lesson 3, day 3: ....
Obviously, the point is, what would be taught? I've heard this question posed to 4 different pro ID people, and they all stumble. The better ones divert the question, but it is never answered. The truth is that in order to bring this to the schools we would either have to begin a huge religious curriculum embracing all religion, or we would have to completely obliterate the division of church and state which is the keystone of this country (in my mind).
I think that the root of the problem to this debate is the attempt to make the whole thing one sided. Our entire race has always had two very distinct sides to its intelligence: belief and the search for more knowledge. These are both very important and fundimental to who we are, and to try and illiminate one and make the other fill both relms, in my mind, would be devistating.
Sure Mike, but I'm not talking about what should be taught in a science class. You already know my position on that. I wanted to avoid the politics, so only science and philosophy is left.
Consider that if the universe was just a couple degrees colder or hotter and all the neccessary elements for life were not in place at the time of conception, we would not be here to have this dicussion. It is not unreasonable to believe that there is more to our biological adventure, but you already know this. :-)
What is it that makes us look at the universe and call it "elegant" and "magnificent"? We used to think the stars were gods, we later realized that they were only planets or balls of burning gas. Did that knowledge cheapen their beauty? Science has explanations for so many things and yet, a fantastic sunrise or a shooting star still causes us to catch our breath. What is this feeling and most importantly, why?
Jessi, I'd say that your questions are at the fundimental base of why we have both faith and the persuit of knowledge. They are the reasons for the why...lets face it, if we didn't care about such things, if intrigue, interest, fear, desire, etc. didn't exhist, then there'd be no drive to embrace faith or persue knowledge. As for how we obtained these amazing feelings/thoughts/ideas, that's a question that leads to wonderful debate :0D
Well, if mankind has been arond evolving for millions of years, we would certainly expect to be more advanced than we are. Humans haven't figured our how to get along with one another, found the cure for colds or cancer, not to mention the secrets to controling weather. Then there is that nasty thing called death. It was brought on by not listening to the Intelligent Designer.
Post a Comment
<< Home