Theistic Evolution Leaves Sceptic Unconvinced

A sceptic has no need for God in this scenario. Image courtesy of José-Manuel Benito Álvarez, Wikipedia.





Joel Kontinen

Sceptics are not actually fond of Alvin Plantinga, emeritus professor of philosophy at Notre Dame University, as he has repeatedly criticised “the four horsemen of the new atheism” (as he calls them), or Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, Sam Harris and Christopher Hitchens.

Although Plantinga has successfully defended the theistic worldview, sceptics have noted that he is not exactly logical in all aspects of his argumentation. Professor Plantinga thinks that God might have used evolution as His mechanism of creation.

He has said that religion (especially Christianity) is compatible with the naturalistic view of science (that is all too often newspeak for Darwinian evolution).

In his book Where the Conflict Really Lies: Science, Religion, and Naturalism (Oxford University Press, 2011), Plantinga suggests:

“The scientific theory of evolution is not incompatible with Christian belief; what is incompatible with it is the idea that evolution, natural selection, is unguided. But that idea isn’t part of evolutionary theory as such; it’s instead a metaphysical or theological addition.”

Recently, Tim Callahan examined Plantinga’s views critically in e-Skeptic, the newsletter of American sceptics. Callahan finds it difficult to believe that the God of the Bible (or any creator) would have resorted to a Darwinian mechanism. He points out that fossils speak of mass extinctions and death. During the assumed millions of years, life on Earth has been on the verge of total destruction several times.

Genesis describes a world that was originally perfect in every way. Callahan is right in saying that Plantinga is inconsistent. Theistic creation and atheistic evolution are incompatible.

The Bible speaks of an almighty God who did miracles instantly in both the Old and the New Testament. He did not need to wait for billions of years before being able to create man in his image. He made him on the sixth day of creation that lasted only a fraction of the time that Darwinian evolution assumes it took to evolve humans.

Source:

Callahan, Tim. 2011. Where the Substance Really Isn’t. e-Skeptic (2 November).

More Poor Logic From Richard Dawkins

Richard Dawkins is hardly known for his brilliant logic. His fresh book is no exception.



Joel Kontinen

Richard Dawkins has written a new book, this time on evolution. He says that The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution (Bantam Press/Simon & Schuster, 2009) is not an anti-religious book.

Having said that he goes on to write, "God, to repeat this point, which ought to be obvious, but isn't, never made a tiny wing in his eternal life."

Logic has never been Richard Dawkins’ forte. Philosopher Alvin Plantinga, for instance, has suggested that Dawkins’ arguments are exceedingly poor:

You might say that some of his forays into philosophy are at best sophomoric, but that would be unfair to sophomores; the fact is (grade inflation aside), many of his arguments would receive a failing grade in a sophomore philosophy class.

Now even New Scientist, which usually has a high view of Richard Dawkins, suspects that he simply cannot control himself. It is difficult to keep boiling anger in check.

Born in Kenya in 1941, Dawkins had to attend his school’s morning prayers or assembly as it was called in those days. Perhaps his aversion to religion stems from the time spent listening to Scripture passages and singing hymns. He might just have clothed it in a scientific garb.

Dawkins’ age is beginning to be obvious in his text. He suggests that in the good old days people were smarter and he did not have to argue that evolution had happened. They just believed it. Now the task is much harder for poor ol’ Richard.

But perhaps Dawkins should stop to think whether the reluctance to believe in Darwinian evolution really stems from ignorance. It could well be that the recent scandals involving Archaeoraptor and the Ida fossil have made people more skeptical of Darwinism, making them see the attire that Emperor Charles is sporting.

Sources:


Olson, Randy. 2009. Review: The Greatest Show on Earth by Richard Dawkins. New Scientist 2725 (14 September) http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20327256.400-review-the-greatest-show-on-earth-by-richard-dawkins.html?DCMP=OTC-rss&nsref=online-news

Plantinga, Alvin. 2007. The Dawkins Confusion. Naturalism 'ad absurdum'. Christianity Today. (1 March). http://www.christianitytoday.com/bc/2007/marapr/1.21.html.