C S. Lewis on Evolution and Intelligent Design

Table Of Content

• Was Darwin Wrong? No—Evidence for Evolution Is Overwhelming.
• Comments: Creationism vs Evolution
• A theory in crisis?
• ID makes its living on what it takes to be deficiencies, incompletions, or gaps in existing science.
• PROOFS FOR THE EXISTENCE OF GOD
• Notes for “The Intelligent Design Argument”
• Contemporary beliefs

Evolution is a creative scavenger, taking what is available and putting it to new use. The correct metaphor for the Darwinian process is not that of a First World engineer, but that of a Third World auto mechanic who will get your car running again, but only if the parts already lying around can be used for the repair” (emphasis added). On the 150th anniversary of Charles Darwin's On the Origin of Species, we look back on 6 pieces of evidence that still spark debate today.

Was Darwin Wrong? No—Evidence for Evolution Is Overwhelming.

Chemical oxidation is the only correct explanation for rusting. Therefore, these incorrect theories are never taught in the science classroom, except perhaps to explain to the student why these theories are wrong. In all fields of science, we observe extremely complex structures that carry out specialized tasks (complex molecules, intricate crystals, vertex structure of type II superconductors, fractal symmetry, etc.) that form all by themselves, given the raw materials and suitable temperatures.

Comments: Creationism vs Evolution

There is no experiment that could be created, even in principle, that could prove definitively that Intelligent Design is false, since an intelligent designer might have anticipated the experiment and manipulated the results to pass the test. Young Earth Creationism and Gap Creationism believe that humanity was created by God, but while Young Earth Creationism claims the Earth is less than 10,000 years old and was reshaped by the flood, Gap Creationism claims the world is the scientifically accepted age. Progressive creationism believes humanity was directly created by God, based on primate anatomy, while intelligent design and theistic evolution include a variety of beliefs based on the idea that divine intervention led to something that may appear like evolution.

A theory in crisis?

The above paragraph should not be interpreted as implying that God does not interact with the physical world. This is certainly not the case, as Maimonides has stressed. Thus, the key question is not whether, but how God influences events. Let us now turn our attention to the heavenly bodies, whose ceaseless motion can be observed day after day, year after year, century after century. It must surely be a supernatural entity (God to the medieval theologian; Intelligent Designer in today’s terminology). “Many of the proteins of the eye lens, for example, began their careers doing something completely different and unrelated to vision.

Intelligent Evolution - Harvard Magazine

Intelligent Evolution.

Posted: Thu, 31 Aug 2023 04:23:55 GMT [source]

In fruit flies, for instance, the mutation called Antennapedia causes legs to sprout where antennae should grow. These abnormal limbs are not functional, but their existence demonstrates that genetic mistakes can produce complex structures, which natural selection can then test for possible uses. In early January 2006, the newly elected Dover Area School Board rescinded the former school board’s policy that required teachers to include a statement about intelligent design in ninth grade biology lessons on evolution. Most of the board members who had voted for the previous policy did not win re-election. Overseeing the curriculum is one of the roles of the school board.

PROOFS FOR THE EXISTENCE OF GOD

I tend to think that that will prevail, because I think it's the truth. But if it's not the truth, it won't prevail, and it shouldn't. I'm glad for an opportunity to explain the wedge strategy, because I conceived it. I know it can be made to sound like something sinister and conspiratorial. But the wedge strategy as I have explained it is quite simple and innocent.

# The Intelligent Design Argument

These mutations manifest themselves in different phenotypes, or physical characteristics, in living organisms. Organisms whose characteristics are better suited for the surrounding environment survive and reproduce, passing on their mutated DNA to subsequent generations. This is often called "survival of the fittest", and it is not a random process. As the surviving organisms reproduce, and this process repeats over several generations, the species evolves. Pigliucci argued that the concept of intelligent design “is founded on an argument from ignorance.” Proponents of the theory say, “I cannot explain x, therefore x must have been intelligently designed,” he said.

Live Not by Lies: Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn and Intelligent Design - Discovery Institute

Live Not by Lies: Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn and Intelligent Design.

Posted: Sat, 14 Oct 2023 07:00:00 GMT [source]

Consequently, people often wonder, “What is the next step? And I should not be surprised if, when the thing happened, very few people noticed that it was happening. Additionally, all readers and interpreters of Lewis know how effectively he employed his own version of the moral argument. From the arsenal of traditional natural theology, he seemed to prefer this argument, which launches the discussion in Mere Christianity and permeates Abolition of Man.5 And a Supreme Being as a Source of Moral Law would necessarily be rational in nature. A fair summary of Lewis, then, on the possibility of arguing for an Intelligence beyond nature is that he embraced several lines of reasoning in which this theme is either implicit or explicit.

Perhaps 20 or more hominins (not all of them our ancestors) fill the gap between Lucy the australopithecine and modern humans. Mutations that arise in the homeobox (Hox) family of development-regulating genes in animals can also have complex effects. Hox genes direct where legs, wings, antennae and body segments should grow.

That must mean, intelligent design proponents say, the universe was designed by a supernatural being with life in mind. The idea of a single finely-tuned universe shows a limited imagination, Prothero said. Regardless of the future of the theory, it is clear that the debate over intelligent design will continue to be an important and contentious issue. As our understanding of the universe and its origins continues to evolve, it is important to remain open to new ideas and evidence, while also being critical and skeptical of claims that are not supported by science. In conclusion, the theory of intelligent design is a controversial topic that continues to spark debate and discussion among scientists, religious groups, and the general public. While some see it as a viable alternative to evolution, others view it as a religious belief masquerading as science.

Whereas the intelligence of the Ultimate Being is implicit in the cosmological and moral arguments, it is the explicit conclusion of design-type arguments. An intelligent designer would probably be satisfied if he or she invented gunpowder once, but the evolution without a plan does not work that way. Therefore, the eye and the sense of vision have developed several times over the millennia. This is why insects have a completely different eye than ours. The human birth canal is an obvious example of such a suboptimal solution.

As a big-picture story, the theory of evolution that we have today is invalid, although some kind of a theory might be valid. It's true that supernatural causes are a subject outside of science. But intelligent versus unintelligent causes is a subject very much within science.