3.06.13 Basil Jackson Thesis Final Corrected Version
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
NORTH-WEST UNIVERSITY (POTCHEFSTROOM CAMPUS) in association with Greenwich School of Theology UK The Faith Dynamic in Creationism and Evolutionary Theory by E. BASIL JACKSON, MD, MA Thesis submitted for the degree Doctor of Philosophy at the Potchefstroom Campus of the North-West University Promoters: Dr JF Gosling / Dr ST Rochester Co-Promoter: Prof Dr CFC Coetzee November 2012 ABSTRACT This study attempts to examine evolutionary theory and creationism objectively without engaging in an apology for or a criticism of either. It compares the presuppositions and assumptions of both systems, and examines the role of faith in religion and in the scientific theory of evolution. After discussing the nature of the scientific method and the development of the theory of evolution, the study explores the dichotomy of faith and reason, the ways in which these operate in theories of intelligent design and theistic evolution, and the question of whether scientific evolutionary theory can be considered to be a secular religion. The thesis argues that acceptance of the scientific theory of evolution is as dependent upon a faith commitment as is adherence to religion, though the type and quality of the two respective faith systems are very different and, therefore, worthy of comparison and contrast. The study concludes that, while science and evolutionary theory share many of the same features and characteristics of faith and presumption, it is presently not appropriate to claim that evolutionary theory is a secular religion, and that when this opinion is asserted it is worthwhile to analyze the motivation, conscious and unconscious, involved. KEY WORDS: Creationism, Evolution, Faith, Religion, Intelligent Design, Theistic Evolution, Naturalism, Scientific Method, Presuppositionalism. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS For my wife, Leila, who has dedicated her life to my well-being and success and who has stood behind me when the wind was high. And to my academic advisors, Dr. Stuart Rochester, Professor Callie Coetzee and Dr. John Gosling, who all gave me the benefit of their superb academic gifts and have demonstrated great concern and patience in my efforts. And special thanks and appreciation to Peg Evans, who has always been patient, concerned and helpful to a degree far beyond the call of duty. To all I will remain in debt and will be forever thankful that our paths and lives have crossed. i TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 CHAPTER 1: Introduction 1 1.1 Background 1 1.2 Problem Statement 2 1.3 Aim and Objectives 3 1.4 Central Theoretical Argument 4 1.5 Methodology 4 2.0 CHAPTER 2: Science and the Scientific Method 6 2.1 Introduction 6 2.2 Nature of Science 7 2.3 Methodology of Science 15 2.4 Limitations of Science 19 2.5 The Ephemeral Nature of Theory 21 2.6 The Bias in Science 24 2.7 Subjectivity in Science 26 2.8 Metamorphosis of Theory to Fact 28 2.9 Subjective Experience 30 2.10 The Enigma of Consciousness 31 2.11 Evolution Questioned 32 2.12 Worldview 34 2.13 Similar Tracks: Faith-Trust 38 2.14 The Importance of Adequate Scientific Standard 43 2.15 Conclusion 45 3.0 CHAPTER 3: The Development of a Theory 46 3.1 The Theory of Evolution 46 3.2 Pre-scientific Concepts 47 3.3 The Influence of the Enlightenment 50 3.4 Forerunners of Darwin 52 3.5 The Search Continues 53 3.5.1 Examination of the Fossil Record 3.5.2 The Contribution of Chevalier de Lamarck. 3.5.3 Robert Chambers and Organic Evolution 3.5.4 Uniformitarianism 3.6 Darwin’s Giants 56 3.7 The Evolution of Darwin 57 3.8 Modern Developments 61 3.9 The Current Landscape 65 3.10 Non-polemical and Non-Apologetic 65 3.11 Conclusion 67 ii Table of Contents, continued 4.0 CHAPTER 4: Naturalism, Faith and Presuppositionalism 69 4.1 The Naturalistic Bias 69 4.2 The Theological Roots of Naturalism 70 4.3 Evolution a Potential Threat to Naturalism 73 4.4 The Ubiquity of Presuppositions 74 4.5 Faith and Reason 76 4.6 Kuyper’s Analysis of Faith 90 4.7 Applicability of Kuyper’s Integration 95 4.8 Spirit and Faith 97 4.9 Faith and Cognitive Psychology 98 4.10 The Essentiality of Faith 99 4.11 Conclusion 100 5.0 CHAPTER 5: Intelligent Design 101 5.1 Intelligent Design Defined and Described 101 5.2 Intelligent Design in Biology 108 5.3 Intelligent Design as Science 110 5.4 Support and Antagonism 114 5.5 Irreducible Complexity 120 5.6 Accident, Design or Purpose 124 5.7 Intelligent Design and Information Theory 126 5.8 The Anthropic Principle 128 5.9 Conclusions 131 6.0 CHAPTER 6: Theistic Evolution 133 6.1 Creation Defined 133 6.2 Theistic Evolution Defined 134 6.3 Theists for Theistic Evolution 135 6.4 The Attraction of Theistic Evolution 141 6.5 Problems with and Criticism of Theistic Evolution 145 6.6 Ictic versus Processive Creation 151 6.7 Consequences of Ignoring Ictic versus Processive 154 6.8 Creationists Oppose Theistic Evolution 156 6.9 Conclusion 160 7.0 CHAPTER 7: Religion and Evolutionary Theory Compared and Contrasted 163 7.1 Introduction 163 7.2 Characteristics of Religion 163 7.3 Evolutionary Theory and the Origin of Religion 164 7.4 Religion and Evolutionary Psychology 166 7.5 The Domain of Religion 166 7.6 Science Defined 168 7.7 Similarities and Contrasts 169 iii Table of Contents, continued 7.8 Conclusions 175 8.0 CHAPTER 8: Scientific Evolutionary Theory as a Secular Religion 179 8.1 The Definition of Religion 179 8.2 Examples of Definitions 179 8.3 Religion and Health 184 8.4 Non-Religious Religion 186 8.5 Religion and the Ancient Greeks 186 8.6 Freud’s and Jung’s Views of Religion 187 8.7 Characteristics of Religion 188 8.8 The Essence of Religion 189 8.9 The Quasi-religious Dimension of Evolutionary Theory 193 8.10 Conclusion 200 9.0 CHAPTER 9: Conclusion 201 Bibliography 208 1 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background Evolutionary theory remains a controversial field. This is so not only where it impinges upon matters relating to science and theology, but it also draws criticism from its own ranks, from the social sciences and from within evolutionary biology itself. That notwithstanding, however, evolutionary theory has become a prominent force in the landscape of the human sciences. As seekers of objective truth, therefore, it behooves us to search beyond the rhetoric and examine its fundamental claims and logic. As scholars committed to the pursuit of truth in the cognitive and behavioral sciences, this may provide us with a knowledge base required for an informed dialogue on the issue. For Christian believers who are committed to the doctrine of a personal, intelligent Creator who sustains and governs his creation, such an approach also provides them with a fresh opportunity to clarify their thinking regarding the origins of life and to consider how the dynamic of faith may be foundational to both positions. Although scarcely a decade old, the scientific theory of evolution has already developed a high profile within the cognitive sciences (cf. Eccles, 1991; Barkow et al , 1995; Plotkin, 1998). As time has passed and evolutionary theory has been increasingly accepted as a dimension of the corpus of science it has pari passu been assimilated into philosophy and other sub- divisions of science, and has been accepted by many as a foundation for a comprehensive worldview. Evolutionary theory has also been characterised by a number of tertiary commitments that are not logically related to the evolutionary programme, such as anti-theistic biases and other strong reductionisms (Dawkins, 1986). In the ongoing conflict between the Christian and the naturalist worldviews - as exemplified in the creationist position and that of the evolutionary theorist - it appears that little attention has been paid to the fact that both are built upon a foundation of 'faith', irrespective of what terminology is actually employed to describe their respective phenomena. This 2 thesis will deal essentially with the similarities of the psychological dynamics found in each system. 1.2 Problem Statement Even Charles Darwin (1964) admitted in his writings that it was extremely difficult to conceive that this immense and wonderful universe, including human beings with capacity to both look backwards and far into the future, was the result of blind chance. That there is a creedal mysterious element seems to have been conveniently ignored by a significant number of committed Darwinians, many of whom are staunchly anti-theistic and irreligious (cf. Dennett, 1995; Harris, 2006; Stenger, 2007). On the whole, they appear to be oblivious to the fact that the system they vociferously espouse and that of the creationists they vehemently oppose are each built on similar psychological dynamic principles. It must be conceded, however, that there are an increasing number of courageous evolutionary scientists of integrity who are willing to confront this very serious issue (see Carlson, ed., 2000; McGrath, 2004). The scientific theory of evolution demands a faith-based cognitive response in a first coincidence that led to further similar and sequential coincidences. In its basest form, this makes it as much a belief system as any religion. Evolutionists have as yet proved unable to posit a mechanistic first coincidence. Thus far, their best efforts have yielded only the faith-based assumption that each step must have had a necessary survival advantage, the means by which evolution from simple to complex has occurred (cf. McIntyre, 1999; Rose & Rose, eds, 2000). It is accepted by all that religion is built on the foundation of faith.