| Theistic Evolutionism |
[Nov. 6th, 2008|03:30 pm] |
Boy this is a term that annoys the piss out of me.
Just to set the record straight, I'm not slamming believers who have solid understanding of biology. While I have no reservations about employing arguments against fundamentalism that may simultaneously be unsavory to more liberal theists, I find the average scientifically-literate Christian to be fairly benign.
No, what I mean by "theistic evolutionism" is this way of turning evolution into a form of creationism. It's a Christian apologetic, basically. The basis for this apologetic is the same any anti-evolution apologetic, which is that life is too complex to change on its own, therefore God must be involved. The only difference is that they include evolution as part of God's divine plan. So, it's kind of the watchmaker argument turned on its side.
First of all, evolution is not a theological or even philosophical position. Second, you don't get your own version of evolution just because you're a theist. Again, most theists who understand science already know this, but it seems that some people need this explained to them veeery sloooowly. Whether you believe in a god or not is irrelevant. The theory of evolution is exactly the same either way. If you don't like the idea that the force that guides evolution is not an intelligent one, then you've got a problem, because that's exactly what the theory of evolution says. The external pressure of evolution is not intelligence; it's THE ENVIRONMENT. That's exactly what it says.
Third, I'm sick and fucking tired of evolution being such a focal point for modern theology in the first place. It's no more special than the theory of gravity, but you don't hear anyone going around calling themselves theistic gravityists, do you? Why is this such a subject of paranoia for some people that they have to arbitrarily pull aside this one theory and make sure God is involved? You don't see people falling over themselves to insert God into General Relativity or Quantum Mechanics. And that's kind of funny, considering the cosmological implications of those two. No, for some reason, it's always about evolution.
Besides, isn't there a redundancy here? If you believe in a transcendent God, then is it even necessary to single out evolution as a force that requires God's guidance? Wouldn't that be true of EVERY natural process, if you believe in such a benevolent being? Why don't you just say that God controls the universe? Seems a lot simpler to me.
The point is, evolution doesn't need an apologetic. It's a natural process on which a theoretical model is based. How many other models are you aware of that employ God in some way? Oh, I know. NONE OF THEM! That's because adding God to a model doesn't add to our understanding of how it works and is therefore asinine. IT'S JUST NATURE!
Schmucks! |
|
|