Tuesday, January 03, 2006

Another person who thinks ID is about religion

In his book, Tom Bethell discusses a number of areas of science that are rather controversial. In the linked article, he discusses a topic that divides the conservative community – evolution.

After repeating a number of errors about evolution, he gets to the reason why he and his ilk object to evolution:

The underlying problem, rarely discussed, is that the conclusions of evolutionism are based not on science, but on a philosophy: the philosophy of materialism, or naturalism. Living creatures, including human beings, are here on Earth, and we got here somehow. If atoms and molecules in motion are all that exist, then their random interactions must account for everything that exists, including us. That is the true underpinning of Darwinism. What needs to be examined in detail is not so much the religion behind intelligent design as the philosophy behind evolution.

And there you have it. Not only do we have the phrase, "the religion behind intelligent design", we have the point of contention. On one side of the argument is naturalism – the notion that everything we see around us came into being as the result of the action of natural law.

On the other side, we have – what?

When naturalistic and material causes are ruled out, we have left, by logical necessity, causes that are non-material and non-natural. Something (or someone) outside the scope of natural law. It is to this praeternatural entity that Design is attributed. And it is this Designer that Bethell invokes to give life meaning.

No comments: