4 Causes and 4 Effects: “Intelligent Design Movement” and “Darwinian Evolution”

               “The combination of the four causes and the four effects is the most comprehensive and capable framework that has been developed so far whereby to evaluate the impacts and implications of new technologies.” – William Sheridan (“The Paradigm Shift of the Information Age,” 1990)

In response to Aristotle’s Four Causes – Material, Efficient, Formal and Final - 20th century culture, media and technology theorist Marshall McLuhan – the so-called “Sage of the Wired Age” – came up with Four Effects: Retrieval, Reversal, Obsolescence and Enhancement (or Amplification). This blog post briefly outlines the Four Effects and then applies them along with Aristotle’s Four Causes to two contemporary topics: the Intelligent Design Movement and Darwinian Evolution.

The Laws of Media: Four Effects

Viewed in the form of a (here sequential, but meant as simultaneous) tetrad, Marshall McLuhan poses the following questions about media:

A. “What recurrence or RETRIEVAL of earlier actions and services is brought into play simultaneously by the new form? What older, previously obsolesced ground is brought back and inheres in the new form?”

B. “When pushed to the limits of its potential, the new form will tend to reverse what had been its original characteristics. What is the REVERSAL potential of the new form?”  

C. “If some aspect of a situation is enlarged or enhanced, simultaneously the old condition or un-enhanced situation is displaced thereby. What is pushed aside or OBSOLESCED by the new ‘organ’?”

D. “What does the artefact ENHANCE or intensify or make possible or accelerate? This can be asked concerning a wastebasket, a painting, a steamroller, or a zipper, as well as about a proposition in Euclid or a law of physics. It can be asked about any word or phrase in any language.” (Laws of Media, 1988)     

As simple as it sounds, these are the so-called ‘laws of media’ in brief; four categories applicable to any form and content of media, theory or human artefact. The invitation is to try it out on your own terms. McLuhan’s method suggests that the reader imagine them-self asking the question: what does the new medium retrieve, what does it reverse into, what does it obsolesce and what things does it enhance or amplify? Such a general framework for inquiry into scientific research and translation of experiments can help scientists and scholars to reflect further upon the meaning(s) of terms in their theories, in hopes that by clarifying them the general public may better understand their relevance.

~~

Tetrad: Intelligent Design Movement

A. Causes of the Intelligent Design Movement

1.   Material – Biological scientists have discovered ‘molecular machines’ which have analogical value for (mechanical) design (cf. engineering) theories…

2.   Formal – Doubts about neo-Darwinism and anti-evolutionism campaigns continue in the U.S.A.; evolutionary theory is still theoretically (ir)relevant 150+ years after Darwin’s Origin of Species; public educational backlash against naturalism, materialism, reductionism, scientism and secularization; right-leaning, fundamentalist-rising democratic mass (G.W. Bush’s U.S.A.); at crucial time in USAmerican and World history for challenges to religious freedom – religion: to be or not to be discussed in the public arena (and how!?); current philosophical views of biology and genetics as non-reductive fields; substance, science and spirit prevail for students…

3.   Efficient – C. Thaxton, W. Bradley and R. Olsen explore The Mystery of Life’s Origins (1984); natural scientists and scholars who are predominantly religious monotheists formulate a scientific hypothesis following the rejection of ‘creation science’ in the U.S. Supreme Court (1987); P. Johnson reads M. Denton and R. Dawkins and later puts Darwin on Trial (1991), M. Behe reads M. Denton and later coins the term ‘irreducible complexity’ (1996) in molecular biology; P. Johnson calls a meeting at Pajaro Dunes, California (1993) and the scholarly group ‘votes’ for ‘intelligent design’ (ID) as the concept duo which could potentially overthrow the ideology of naturalistic evolution, reduce secularization and upset the neo-Darwinian evolutionary paradigm; promotions via institutes (the Discovery Institute, 1990, and its Center for [the Renewal of] Science and Culture, 1996), think tanks (ARN, ISCID) and university student clubs (I.D.E.A.) across the U.S.A. and even occasionally abroad; ID internet discussion groups, forums, blogs and news lists…

4.   Final – the designer or Designer, imago Dei; anthropic principle, human purpose, direction, goal-orientation and teleology; personal and social meaning; spiritual transcendence; non-evolutionary ethics…

B. Effects of the Intelligent Design Movement 

1. Retrieval – William Paley[1] (Natural Theology, 1802); faith-based ‘social gospel[2];’ professional paradigm revolutionaries[3] (Discovery Institute); the 1925 Scopes (‘Monkey’) Trial; educational curriculum and textbook concerns; gradualism, as a scientific movement; Big Bang Cosmology[4]; quests for a holy grail[5] of theistic science[6]… 

2. Reversal (reverses into) – ‘Design’ or ‘Intelligence’ dogmatism[7]; reductionistic spiritualism[8][9] or fideism; laws of information; philosophy of mathematics and probability; micro-biologism[10] and non-evolutionary ethics; biological idealism[11]; Intelligence Quota (IQ) testing and faith in the social sciences[12]… 

3. Obsolescence – Creation science[13]; biblical literalism[14], the creation story of an intervening Divinity[15]; discussion of an original human pair – Adam and Eve; evolution as sole possible explanation of the origin(s) of species[16]; unquestionable dominance of evolutionary theories in bio-physical sciences[17]; methodological materialism[18] and naturalistic evolution[19] as a hegemonic forces, randomness and chance explanations as patently fruitful scientific tools in properly teleological fields… 

4. Amplification/ Enhancement – Pattern recognition[20][21]; complexity studies and specification-ism[22][23] (EF, IC[24], CSI[25][26], SC[27]); small probabilities[28] (UPB[29]); inferences to design; (super-)natural theology and philosophy[30]; a (supposed) law of conservation of information (LCI) and information theory[31]; intelligent agency[32][33] and choice[34]; revolutionary rhetoric[35] 

~~

Tetrad: Darwinian Evolution

 A. Causes of (theories of) Darwinian Evolution 

1.   Material – Modern science establishes coherent ideas of taxonomy (cf. Carl Linnaeus, 1735) and geological uniformity (cf. Charles Lyell, Principles of Geology, 1830), which have analogical value for evolutionary theories; Zoonomia, by Erasmus Darwin (1794); Beagle voyage for Darwin (1831-1836); Herbert Spencer coins the social-scientific anthropological phrase ‘survival of the fittest’ (in Social Statics, 1851); Darwin contacted by A. Wallace about a new theory of Natural Selection, Darwin finally publishes On the Origin of Species…(1858); doubts (skepsis) about Special Creation and Biblical Literalism spread rapidly while publications on anti-evolution-ism raise controversy; current philosophical views of physics and nature as atomistic fields[36]… 

2.   Formal – Charles Darwin’s Edinburgh and Cambridge education; “decided I should be a clergyman” – Darwin at Cambridge University; I. Newton’s physics[37]; Enlightenment Rationalism; A. Comte’s Positivism; Adam Smith’s ‘market principles;’ Population[38] studies, especially influenced by[39] Thomas Malthus’ Essay on…Population (1798); Jean-Baptiste Lamarck’s Philosophie Zoologique (1809); Alexander von Humboldt’s Personal Narrative (1852); Bourgeois landowner views and values of Civilization and Barbarian-ism[40]; Darwin living at Down, England far away from city life[41] with doubts about purpose[42] of human life, teleology and the concept of design… 

3.   Efficient – Darwin’s empirical scientific research in support of Lyell’s uniformity thesis; personal work habits and organizational characteristics[43]; Charles Darwin, naturalist, works in his home[44] at Down, England, convinced of the mutability of species; parallel influence, correspondence and collegial support from Charles Lyell[45][46] (Geologist), Alfred Wallace[47] (Naturalist), Joseph Hooker (Botanist), Thomas Huxley[48] (Biologist, Apologist), Asa Gray (Botanist), James Russell Lowell (Writer); Herbert Spencer (Sociologist); last but not least, Murray – Darwin’s Publisher in London… 

4.   Final – It is no ‘revolution;’ the logic of un-directed change: Que sera, sera (What will be will be); A New (Naturalistic) Science for a New (Natural Scientific) Epistemological Hegemony… 

B. Effects of (theories of) Darwinian Evolution 

1. Retrieval – The ‘real’ mutability of species (i.e. 19th century ‘like confessing a murder’ – 21st century generally accepted) including humans[49]; Uniformitarian-ism; Thomas Hobbes: the war of all-against-all; Cambridge Platonism[50]; Adam Smith’s laissez-faire capitalism; Progress from lower-to-higher forms[51] (cf. the Great Chain of Being); Professional Paradigm Revolutionaries[52], Quest(s) for a unifying theory between humans, animals and Natural process-origins… 

2.    Reversal (reverses into) – Evolutionary Dogmatism[53][54] and Ethics[55]; The Scopes Trial (1925); Social Darwinism[56][57], and Evolutionary Philosophy[58]; Animism, Spiritualism or Materialistic Naturalism[59]; Biological Realism and Idealism[60] in the academy[61]; Laws of Restless Motion and Progress[62]; Eternal recurrence[63]; Philosophy of Mathematics and Probability; Cumulative-ism (i.e. the belief that ‘everything is based on something prior’ is an instrument of evolutionary philosophy); Micro-Biology and Non-evolutionary Ethics (or aesthetics, depending on philosophical pre-commitments); Moral Hedonism or Nihilism[64]; ‘Process for the sake of Process’ (e.g. process philosophy); Evolutionary Theism[65], Theistic Evolutionism[66] and/or Evolutionary Creationism[67]… 

3.    Obsolescence – Biblical Literalism[68]; the Genesis Creation story; discussion of an original human pair[69][70]; Divine Intervention-ism[71]; Special Creation as sole possible explanation of the origin(s) of species[72]; unquestionable dominance of interventionist theories in the biological sciences; Theistic Evolutionism[73] – you come to the meet the wave; randomness and chance explanations as patently fruitful scientific tools/mechanisms, especially in non-natural sciences… 

4.    Amplification/ Enhancement – Natural Selection (cf. selective pressures); Naturalism[74]; ‘Survival of the Fittest[75]’ (or ‘struggle for life’); Natural Theology (via Paleyian concepts of design acknowledged but not accepted by Darwinism); Gradualism; Randomness and chance explanations; [76] Ambiguity about theological issues… 

 Dear Reader, the ‘…’ is aimed at you. Please feel welcome to share your contribution to these Tetrads. McLuhan’s method is not a closed system, but invites participation and addition. What would you add or change in the above Tetrads?

Bibliography 

  1. Aristotle. Metaphysics. R. McKeon, Ed. New York: Random House, 1941.
  2. Dembski, William. “Gauging Intelligent Design’s Success” [GIDS]. 2003.
  3. Dembski, William. “Intelligent Design” [ID]. 2003.
  4. Dembski, William.“Becoming a Disciplined Science” [BDS]. 2003.
  5. Dembski, William. Intelligent Design: The Bridge between Science and Theology [ID: the Bridge]. InterVarsity Press, U.S.A., 1999.
  6. Dembski, William. “Intelligent Design as a Theory of Information” [IDaToI]. 1998.
  7. Dembski, William. The Design Inference [TDI]. Cambridge Press, 1998.
  8. Dembski, William, and James M. Kushiner, Signs of Intelligence: Understanding Intelligent Design. Brazos Press. 2001.
  9. McLuhan, Marshall and Eric McLuhan. Laws of Media: The New Science [LoM]. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1988.
  10. Sheridan, William. “The Paradigm Shift of the Information Age,” a review of Marshall and Eric McLuhan’s Laws of Media. 1989.

 


[1] “The theory of intelligent design updates Paley’s watchmaker argument in light of contemporary information theory and molecular biology, purporting to bring this argument squarely within science.” (ID)

[2] “Insofar as there is design in the universe, it is design we recognize strictly through the eyes of faith.” (ID: the Bridge)

[3] “Although ID as a scientific program stands logically prior to ID as cultural movement, this logical priority does not imply temporal priority.” (BDS)

[4] “The theologian may learn from the physicist that the universe began as an infinitely dense fireball known as the Big Bang, whereas the physicist may learn from the theologian that God created the world by means of a divine logos.” (ID: The Bridge)

[5] “Science routinely infers things we can’t see from things we can see. Intelligent Design fits solidly in that tradition.” – Michael Behe (Preface to ID: the Bridge)

[6] “Is intelligent design’s appeal international? Does it cross religious boundaries? Or is it increasingly confined to American evangelicalism?” (BDS)

[7] “[I]ntelligent design as an essential good” (BDS)

[8] “[I]ntelligent design as a tool for liberation from ideologies that suffocate the human spirit, such as reductionism and materialism” (BDS)

[9] “The search for that balance-point underlies all design theoretic research. It’s not all design or all nature but a synergy of the two. Unpacking that synergy is the intelligent design research program in a nutshell.” (GIDS)

[10] “What makes intelligent design controversial is that it purports to find signs of intelligence in biological systems” (GIDS)

[11] “ID is logically speaking the only alternative to a mechanistic evolutionary biology” (BDS)

[12] “Human design and intention meddles everywhere” (GIDS)

[13] “Even leaving aside the creation of the world and focussing solely on human acts of creation, do we find that naturalistic categories have fully explained human creativity?” (ID: the Bridge)

[14] “[I]ntelligent design does not depend on the biblical account of creation.” (ID: The Bridge)

[15] “[I]ntelligent design nowhere attempts to identify the intelligent cause responsible for design in nature.” (ID: The Bridge)

[16] “Intelligent design therefore directly challenges Darwinism and other naturalistic approaches to the origin and evolution of life.” (GIDS)

[17] “There are entire classes of complex biological systems for which evolutionary biology lacks detailed, testable accounts of how such systems could have emerged.” (GIDS)

[18] “If nature contains a richer set of causes than purely material causes, then intelligent design is a live possibility and methodological materialism will misread physical reality.” (to E. Scott)

[19] “If you’re going to reject a reigning paradigm, you have to have a new improved paradigm with which to replace it. Naturalistic evolution is the reigning paradigm.” – Dembski (ID: the Bridge)

[20]  “[C]haracteristic features or patterns that point to an intelligence.” (ID)

[21] “Taken in its most fundamental sense, the word design denotes a pattern or blueprint.” (TDI)

[22] “Arguably, my most important research contribution has been to lay out the logical and statistical underpinnings for specifications.” (GIDS)

[23] “No evolutionist or creationist I know denies that LIFE is specified.” (TDI)

[24] “The irreducibly complex systems Behe considers require numerous components specifically adapted to each other and each necessary for function. On any formal complexity-theoretic analysis, they are complex in the sense required by the complexity-specification criterion.” (ID: The Bridge)

[25] Complex Specified Information (CSI): “Design theorists see specified complexity as the key to understanding biological information.” (GIDS)

[26] “CSI is an empirically detectable entity that transcends natural causes.” (ID: The Bridge)

[27] Specified complexity (SC):“a statistical criterion for identifying the effects of intelligence.” (GIDS)

[28] “The design inference constitutes the most exciting application of the Law of Small Probability.” … “In other words, it is not just the sheer improbability of an event, but also the conformity of the event to a pattern, that leads us to look beyond chance to explain the event.” (TDI)

[29] “In The Design Inference I justify…a universal probability bound of 10-150 based on the number of elementary particles in the observable universe, the duration of the observable universe until its heat death and the Plank time. A probability bound of 10-150 translated to 500 bits of information. Accordingly, specified information of complexity greater than 500 bits cannot reasonably be attributed to chance.” (ID: The Bridge)

[30] “Design has no prior commitment to supernaturalism.” (ID: The Bridge)

[31] “Information is not reducible to natural causes and [that] the origin of information is best sought in intelligent causes. Intelligent design thereby becomes a theory for detecting and measuring information, explaining its origin and tracing its flow.” (ID: The Bridge)

[32] “From the perspective of the natural sciences, design, as the action of an intelligent agent, is not a fundamental creative force in nature.” (“Detecting Design in the Natural Sciences” in Intelligent Design? Natural History magazine)

[33] “As a pattern of inference the design inference is not tied to any doctrine of intelligent agency.” (TDI)

[34] “The principal characteristic of intelligent agency is choice.” (ID: The Bridge)

[35] “It will be intelligent design’s reinstatement of design within biology that will be the undoing of naturalism in Western culture.” (ID: The Bridge)

[36] “The first thing is not seed but the complete being; e.g. we must say that before the seed there is man,—not the man produced from the seed, but another from whom the seed comes.” – Aristotle (Metaphysics, 1073a 1)

[37] “My life goes on like clockwork, and I am fixed on the spot where I shall end it.” – C. Darwin at Down to Captain Fitz-Roy (1846, 159)

[38] “There is no exception to the rule that every organic being naturally increases at so high a rate, that if not destroyed, the earth would soon be covered by the progeny of a single pair.” – Darwin (Origin, 1859)

[39] Notable Contemporaries: Otto von Bismarck (German Chancellor, 1862-1890), John Stuart Mill (1806-1873), Abraham Lincoln (1809*-1865), Charles Dickens (1812-1870), Soren Kierkegaard (1813-1855), Richard Wagner (1813-1883), Marx (1818-1883) Fyodor Dostoevsky (1821-1881), et al.

[40] “[Nikolai] Danilevsky viewed Darwinian competition as ‘a purely English doctrine’ founded upon a line of British thought stretching from Hobbes through Adam Smith to Malthus. Natural selection, he wrote, is rooted in ‘the war of all against all, now termed the struggle for existence—Hobbes’ theory of politics; on competition—the economic theory of Adam Smith. … Malthus applied the very same principle to the problem of population. … Darwin extended both Malthus’ partial theory and the general theory of the political economists to the organic world’.” – Daniel Todes (Darwin after Malthus: The Struggle for Existence in Russian Evolutionary Thought, 1988)

[41] “In 1842 a coach drive of some twenty miles was the usual means of access to Down; and even now that railways have crept closer to it, it is singularly out of the world, with nothing to suggest the neighbourhood of London, unless it be the dull haze of smoke that sometimes clouds the sky.” – Francis Darwin (“Life at Down”, 160)

[42]  “[That] the existence of so-called natural laws implies purpose. I cannot see this. Not to mention that many expect that the several great laws will some day be found to follow inevitably from some one single law…I cannot see that there is then necessarily any purpose.” – C. Darwin (The Autobiography of Charles Darwin, “Religion,” July 3, 1881)

[43] “My habits are methodical, and this has been of not little use for my particular line of work…I have had ample leisure time from not having to earn my own bread. Even ill-health, though it has annihilated several years of my life, has saved me from the distractions of society and amusement. / My success as a man of science, whatever this may have amounted to, has been determined, as far as I can judge, by complex and diversified mental qualities and conditions. Of these the most important have been—the love of science—unbounded patience in long reflection over any subject—industry in observing and collecting facts—and a fair share of invention as well as of common sense. With such moderate abilities as I possess, it is truly surprising that thus I should have influenced to a considerable extent the beliefs of scientific men on some important points.” – Darwin (Autobiography)

[44] “The reader must imagine my father corresponding on problems in geology, geographical distribution, and classification; at the same time collecting facts on such varied points as the stripes on horses’ legs, the floating of seeds, the breeding of pigeons, the form of bees’ cells and the innumerable other questions to which his gigantic task demanded answers.” (Autobiography of Charles Darwin, 183)

[45] “I always feel as if my books came half out of Lyell’s brain.” – Darwin (1844)

[46] “I am most happy and grateful to have you [J. Hooker] on my side. To have Alfred Wallace on my side as well. And Asa Gray at Harvard. If you three authorities agree that man is a very special species, then God is still very much in our midst.” – Charles Lyell (1872)

[47] “The new idea or principle which Darwin had arrived at twenty years before, and which occurred to me at this time, answers all these questions and solves all these difficulties, and it is because it does so, and also because it is in itself self-evident and absolutely certain, that it has been accepted by the whole scientific world as affording a true solution of the great problem of the origin of the species.” – Alfred Wallace (“My Life”)

[48] “The gradual lapse of time has now separated us by more than a decade from the date of the publication of the Origin of Species; and whatever may be thought or said about Mr. Darwin’s doctrines, or the manner in which he has propounded them, this much is certain, that in a dozen years the Origin of Species has worked as complete a revolution in Biological Science as the Principia did in Astronomy” and it had done so, “because in the words of Helmholtz, it contains ‘an essentially new creative thought’.” – Thomas Huxley (Autobiography of C.D., 287)

[49] “Living creatures came into being from moisture evaporated by the sun. Man was originally similar to another creature — that is, to a fish.” – Hippolytus Ref. I,6,6

[50] Early uses of Evolution: Henry More and Ralph Cudworth, seventeenth-century Cambridge Platonists:  More – “evolution of outward forms spread in the world’s vast spright,” 1647, and later, “the whole evolution…of ages, from everlasting to everlasting, is…represented to God at once.” (1667, Divine Dialogues) Cudworth: “The periods of divine Providence, here in this world, are commonly longer, and the evolution thereof slower.” (The True Intellectual System of the Universe, 1677)

[51] “The idea of evolution gets some of its moral, social, even cosmic significance from its implication that the general motion in the world of living things, perhaps in the universe, is a progress from lower to higher forms.” – Mortimer J. Adler et al. in The Great Ideas (from the Great Books of the Western World series, 1952)

[52] featuring Thomas Huxley, as Darwin’s Bulldog

[53] “Our nineteenth century is dying away under the hypnosis of the dogma of Evolution.” – Abraham Kuyper (Vrije University, Presidential Address, 20/10/1899)

[54] Evolution: Theory in Crisis (1986) – Michael Denton

[55] “Modern science directly implies that the world is organized strictly in accordance with mechanistic principles. There are no purposive principles whatsoever in nature. There are no gods and no designing forces that are rationally detectable….
Second modern science directly implies that there are no inherent moral or ethical laws, no absolute guiding principles for human society. / Third, human beings are marvelously complex machines. The individual human, becomes an ethical person by means of two primary mechanisms: heredity and environmental influences. That is all there is. / Fourth, we must conclude that when we die. We die that is the end of us…

Finally, free will as it is traditionally conceived – the freedom to make un-coerced and unpredictable choices among alternative possible courses of action-simply does not exist….there is no way that evolutionary processes as currently conceived can produce a being that can truly free to make choices.” – William Provine (“Evolution and the Foundation of Ethics”)

[56] A Civic Biology (1922) – George William Hunter

[57] “As Darwin discovered the law of evolution in organic nature, so Marx discovered the law of evolution in human history.” – Friedrich Engels (eulogy to Marx)

“The whole theory of Marx is an application of the theory of evolution.” – Lenin (“State and Revolution” in Heritage of Western Civilization: 287)

[58] “On the shelves, several books and articles were titled, “On the _____ of Darwin”, or “Darwin’s _____”, and then I saw books like Darwin among the poets (1932), and Darwin among the machines (1897), but by no means did Darwinian literature dominate the room, as Evolution after Darwin (1960) indicated. Books on biological and genetic evolution, geology and zoology, and all other forms of physical or material evolution were always stacked on the rows of the lower shelves in the column. On the right side of the room, books on literary evolution, geographical evolution, social and cultural evolution, and even psychological evolution began to appear. Several books in particular caught my eye, like Evolution and Anthropology (1959), The Evolution of an Evolutionist (1975), Evolution as a Religion (1985), Evolution: an Evolving Theory (1993), Evolution and Biocomputation (1995), Freedom Evolves (2003), and I was amazed by the volume of literature strictly dealing with the idea of evolution. The evolution of motorcycles, the evolution of music, the evolution of golf, the evolution of painting – there seemed to be almost no end to the use of this theoretical metaphor, the word coined originally in the 16th century. And this might be what we really should have been talking about all along. How far and in what disciplines is the evolution metaphor to be stretched, and when has it over-used its scientific and non-scientific value? You can be sure that the professor made certain anything published on the topic of ‘evolution’ made its way into this office.” – anonymous article (“Home for an Evolutionary Philosopher,” 2002)

[59] “The important point about the standard evolutionary story is that the human species and all of its features are the wholly physical outcome of a purely physical process…If this is the correct account of origins, then there seems neither need, nor room, to fit any nonphysical substances or properties into our theoretical account of ourselves. We are creatures of matter. And we should learn to live with that fact.” – Paul Churchland (in Moreland & Rae, 101)

[60] “There is no spirit-driven life force, no throbbing, heaving, pullulating, protoplasmic, mystic jelly. Life is just bytes and bytes and bytes or digital information.” – Dawkins (River Out of Eden)

[61] Biology – “the realism of evolution” – Daniel Boorstin

[62] “The endless cycles of idea and action // Endless invention, endless experiment // Brings knowledge of motion, but not of stillness.” – T.S. Eliot (“The Rock”)

[63] “I, the last disciple of the philosopher Dionysus — I, the teacher of eternal recurrence.” – F. Nietzsche (Twilight of the Idols)

[64] “This is one of the hardest lessons for humans to learn. We cannot admit that things might be neither good nor evil, neither cruel nor kind, but simply callous – indifferent to all suffering, lacking all purpose.” – Dawkins (River Out of Eden)

[65] Evolution: “An ordinary natural process—a process that is not fundamentally different in character or status from other natural processes, such as a summer sunrise, a winter snowstorm, the blooming of a flower, or the birth of a child.” – Howard Van Till

[66] “Theistic evolution is woefully—even perniciously—confused.” – Phillip Johnson

[67] “Darwin’s view of evolution in the famed 1859 work was teleological.”… “The time has come to let the historical record speak in order to move beyond the ill-informed myths of Charles Darwin’s religious beliefs and the misunderstood theological implications of the theory of biological evolution.” – Denis Lamoureux (“Theological Insights from Charles Darwin, 2004: 5, 9)

[68] “fundamentalism, in the sense of strict biblical literalism, is a minority position among religious believers” – Dembski (Signs of Intelligence, 2001: 14)

[69] “Even had it been rendered highly probable, which we doubt, that the animal creation has been developed into its numerous and widely different varieties by mere evolution, it would still require an independent investigation of overwhelming force and completeness to justify the presumption that man is but a term in this self-evolving series.” – London Times (1872)

[70] Lauryn Hill – “Adam Lives in Theory,” MTV Unplugged (2001)

[71] “Darwinism removed the whole idea of God as the Creator of organisms from the sphere of rational discussion. Darwin pointed out that no supernatural designer was needed; since Natural Selection could account for any new form of life, there is no room for a supernatural agency in its evolution.” – Julian Huxley (“At Random, A Television Preview,” in Evolution after Darwin, 1960: 41)

[72] “Two suppositions only are open to us; the one that the feeling which responds to religious ideas resulted, along with all other human faculties, from an act of special creation; the other that it, in common with the rest, arose by a process of evolution.” – Herbert Spencer (First Principles, 1862)

[73] We should think of God as “the evolutionary-historical process that has brought us into being.” – Gordon Kaufman (Theology for a Nuclear Age. Manchester U, 1985: 43)

[74] E.g. being a naturalist ‘like C. Darwin’

[75] “The best is the guy with the most.” – Paul Newman (Fast Eddie – The Color of Money)

[76] “[Man] stands alone in the universe, a unique product of a long, unconscious, impersonal, material process with unique understanding and potentialities. These he owes to no one but himself and it is to himself that he is responsible. He is not the creature of uncontrollable and undeterminable forces, but he is his own master. He can, and must, decide and manage his own destiny.” – George Simpson (“The World into Which Darwin Led Us,” Science, 131, 1960: 966)

0 Responses to “4 Causes and 4 Effects: “Intelligent Design Movement” and “Darwinian Evolution””



  1. Leave a Comment

Be welcome to leave a comment at Human Extension!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s




Contact the Author

E-mail: gregorisandstrom@yahoo.com

Latest Tweets

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: