Intelligent Design and Evolution

~Science and religion appear to conflict, but both seek to answer the same questions of where do we come from and where are we going~

Is Atheism the answer?

Richard Dawkins argues for a type of militant atheism, which lacks belief in any deity. For Dawkins, natural science and belief in God are two of these “holy” topics. Still, it needs to be debated because science and religion teach people to be satisfied with explanations, authority, and blind faith, not evidence arrived at through the scientific method.

There is no need to attribute evolutionary design to a God; he counterargues that there is a claim against atheism in which “living creatures are too complex to have come about by chance; therefore, they must have had a designer.” He counters this claim that highly improbable events can happen over extended periods. Small changes, natural selection, and mutations can lead to precise and intricate developments in evolution because of gradual steps without Intelligent Design. He explains that Darwin’s theory of evolution is universally accepted and demonstrable; however, when nonprofessional scientists do not accept this theory, it is seen as a “war” between religion and science. For the believers of Intelligent Design, they would argue that there is too much complexity in the universe not to have a god. For Dawkins, the gradual steps of evolution answer any doubt about the complexity of evolution, spanning eons to develop intricate organisms. 

Atheism is not unusual, and there are about 30 million non-religious or secular individuals in the United States, which is second to Christianity. Dawkins also notes that people with higher education are less likely to be religious. He suggests using more neutral defining terms like “agnostic,” “humanist,” or “non-theist” because these are compatible with science. Dawkins ends his argument by explaining how he disregards the reality of the tooth fairy or other supernatural entities and does not entertain the concept of a god. For an agnostic, God’s existence and non-existence are equally likely; nothing can be known beyond the material world, and there is neither faith nor disbelief in deities.

Intelligent Design

Intelligent Design may use William Paley’s “Watchmaker Argument” to argue an intelligent creator is needed based on the constructs of the natural world. The universe’s natural order requires a god to maintain its order, just like a watch. Yet Dawkins contends that evolution was inevitable over eons and through natural selection without a God or master manipulator.

What about unexplained phenomena?

Science is a tool for understanding how the natural world works. The complexity and precision of mathematics cannot be explained by the Big Bang, where something is created from nothing and the universe’s fine-tuning. Science is limited to the natural world and what is physically measurable using the scientific method. Second is agnosticism, which argues there is not enough evidence to prove or disprove the existence of God. Third is Creationism, where God created humans in their current form about 10,000 years ago. Lastly, Intelligent Design is offered as an explanation. An intelligent designer must step in to provide the necessary components for life. Evolutionary theory promotes an atheistic worldview, one where faith must be rejected; evolution cannot explain the complexity of nature. For science to understand nature, science must be drawn closer to God.

---

Further Reading

YouTube video: Francis Collins, The Language of God

YouTube video: Richard Dawkins,  Militant atheism

Paley’s watchmaker argument, website