Friday, March 9, 2012

Sam Gon III and proponents of Intelligent Design

When studying Trilobite evolution Sam Gon III is battling with the same Philosophical and Theological questions as everyone else.

He makes this important statement about Intelligent Design in connection with the trilobite eyes.

I use the term "design" as a lead-in to the parallels between the optic designs of humans and the remarkably evolved morphology of trilobites. 

Trilobites provide some superb examples of evolution in action (see "loss of eyes" below). 

Trilobites make it quite clear that evolution of eyes occurs, and that one does not need to evoke "intelligent design" by a creator to explain them. To do so detracts from the idea of an omniscient being. 

It would have God tinkering with many flawed and suboptimal "designs" and never developing a perfect one. Who would want to worship a god like that?

 I mention this because this page has been used (without my permission) by people espousing "intelligent design" to the public, and I want it to be clear that I do not share those opinions, nor need that flawed argument to underpin my faith. 

Evolution is a remarkable and well-documented process, and breakthroughs in our understanding of its intricacies occur every year. Evolution is not in conflict with religious belief. Ignorance and intolerance damage the benefits of faith. 
Sam Gon III

Personally I agree with most of what Sam Gon III is saying here and especially the final paragraph is essential regardless of once religion.

As he writes, we cannot and we should not invoke spirits or gods or even the One real God to explain natural phenomena as if we were able to see the relation between creation and Creator. This is the standard pit into witch both Atheists and Creationists fall, the one denying and the other enforcing such an element into rational scientific inquiry. What element? That exactly is the point!

However, Sam has this theological point also raised by Richard Dawkin

"It would have God tinkering with many flawed and suboptimal "designs" and never developing a perfect one. Who would want to worship a god like that?"

In other words, the reality does not correspond to our view of a perfect God.

Charles Darwin once wrote "I cannot believe in a God who has created cats to play with the mouse they have captured".

But the fact is that God has created cats to play with the mouse. The problem is not the reality but our image of God.

He is not some philosophical principle or logical mathematical purity but a dangerous and rather bad tempered person.

Let us worship Him as He is and not some pure good image created in our own heads "as God should be" to please us, His creatures!.

No comments:

Post a Comment