Which of these theories is not like the others?
O'Leary
Recently, I wrote on Evolution Weekend, an attempt to convince Christians, or anyway, people who go to church, that it is okay to be Darwinists.
I pointed out that discussions of evolution in school and in the popular press nearly always focus on teaching or defending Darwinism. In its present form, Darwinism looks like a project to market atheism at taxpayer expense. Someone wanted to know, well what about endosymbiosis, gene transfer or neoteny?
Sure, those are all plausible causes of evolution, sometimes discussed.
But I have never heard anyone famously say, as Dawkins said about Darwinism, that they make it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist.
Why not? Because it’s not clear that these processes could not be guided. The mechanisms are proposed simply as mechanisms by which significant changes might take place, not as mechanisms that rule out guidance. It’s the latter point that drives the fanatical attachment to Darwinism that guided Darwin’s original atheist circle, which we now see in the new atheist movement, together with the sick-making adulation of Darwin.
And that, my dears, is the point to keep in mind. As C.S. Lewis came to see, the best reason for doubting Darwin is his defenders.
uncommondescent.com
-----------------------------------------------
Alfred Russel Wallace's Theory of Intelligent Evolution
Michael A. Flannery (Author)
amazon.com
Wallace's Challenge to Darwinism, July 10, 2009
By Darwin Researcher (London) - See all my reviews
This reprinting of sections of Wallace's 1910 publication The World of Life documents the fact that Charles Darwin's theory was not so much an attempt to understand nature as it was an attempt to replace theism with a materialistic, atheistic worldview as documented in The Darwin Myth: The Life and Lies of Charles Darwin by Benjamin Wiker (available on Amazon). In other words, Darwin's purpose was not science but theological. Russel recognized that Darwin's theory explained much, but did not, and could not, explain everything in the natural world. As anyone who has read Darwin's Origin of Species can plainly see, Darwin was not interested in understanding reality but in proving a worldview, a worldview that served both as a lens and blinders in his work. In his excellent introduction to the book, the editor, Professor Flannery, documents the conclusion that Wallace today would be most comfortable in the Intelligent Design camp. Darwin knew of Wallace's heresy, and it upset Darwin greatly. I am thankful that this now rare book is again back in print because it allows us to better understand, not only Darwin's motive in defending his theory but also the major problems the co-founder of evolution had with Darwin's conclusions. Indeed, the book The World of Life effectively challenged Darwinism, a challenge still very much alive today. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink
Comment Comments (10)
7 of 8 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars THE ALTERNATIVE THEORY OF EVOLUTION, August 12, 2009
By Michael JR Jose (the UK) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)
There are two types of theory of evolution, the first is that Life is spelt with a capital `L' and is not by chance but by design, and it is purposeful and meaningful. The second is that life with a small `l' is by chance and not by design, and it has no purpose and no meaning, it is really just an existence. I begin here as these are philosophical positions, not scientific theories, as is so often pretended. This excellent book, which I recommend without reserve, is about Wallace's theory of evolution, which is about Life capitalised, versus Darwin's, which is a life less than ordinary.
.......
|
