The first main point argued by Dawkins is that the size and the complexity of the universe tempt us to think that there was a creator, a God. Science however, managed to emancipate us from explaining everything around us using the word God. Science works on answering question based on evidence. Religion uses faith to ignore the question and pushes it to God. He further argues that the only time faith comes into play is when there is no evidence.
The word theistic means God and cam from the Greek word theos. I am choosing to do my topic on theistic evolution. Theistic evolution means believing in both god and evolution at the same time. The first border of evolution states that there is a god, but he was not directly involved in the origin of life. This view is like Atheistic evolution.
Introduction The Anthropic principle is one attempt to give an account of the regularity in nature through its argument for the compatibility of the universe with conscious life. In general, it suggests that the earth is fine tuned to allow life to emerge. However, this proposition has faced a lot of challenges both from science and religion. The principle has tried to give a rational account that would appeal to scientific understanding yet it has been rejected by science, which has dismissed its proposition and its evidence as subjective and prejudicial. A section of theists would also deny any relation to this theory because of its closer connection to the big bang theory.
Given the fact that the nature of the warring personalities are significantly different, the clashing of ideas with regard to the theory were inevitable. Charles Darwin’s claim was that organisms went through several processes that made them what they are now or the principle of natural selection, whereas, William Paley’s argument is that organisms were created as they were by one “creator” which is God. The former’s claim is more inclined to the principle of evolution while the latter’s argument mainly centers on “natural theology” and the “designer
The Truth Behind the Rhetoric of Carl Sagan One of the largest debates known to modern man is that between creationists and evolutionists. Is human existence evidence of a divine power? Did humankind reach its current state on the reliance of genetic mistakes? Is it of any concern to know one way or another? In his insightful essay, “Do we care what’s true?
Dawkins replied to Lennox on his accusation that the principles of going from simple to complex is the belief of the atheist. By saying that if things were to go from simple to complex they would need explaining why. Lennox says that it makes a lot more sense to believe, that there is an eternal Logos and that the universe and its laws is derivative including the human mind form the Logos, it makes perfectly sense. More sense than to accept that the universe is just a simple fact. Dawkins replies that it makes a hell of a lot more sense to start with something simpler than to start with something more complex.
She says that Cartesian dualism is inconsistent with science. She brings up evolutionary biology and says that apes and humans share a common ancestor but, there's no proof of where the mind comes about. Descartes say that we are independent of the brain, churchland argues that when the brain is damaged it fundamentally change who we are and change our personality/ characteristics. She also bring up computer to argue against cartesian dualism. Descartes says that complex reasoning comes from the mind.
When not examined and pondered on, the relationship between psychology and Christianity today can cause much confusion in an individual, potentially leading to atheism and evolutionism. On the other hand, not examining the relationship between psychology and Christianity can also lead to the close-minded belief that science is evil, and that the only way to any kind of truth is through Christian faith and belief in Christ. There are seven models presented by D.N. Entwistle (2015) that are worth studying when determining how one views the relationship between psychology and Christianity. Upon reflection and examination of the seven models, it appears that the Allies model best explains the relationship between psychology and
Staring with the comparison of Creationism and Intelligent Design, the idea that they are vastly different in their way of processing information is very evident as Creationist believe in the book of Genesis, whilst Intelligent Design uses science to backtrack throughout historical data. These contrasting views are similar to those of Theists and scientists as Theists use Biblical text to interpret the creation of Earth, whereas scientists use the scientific method in order to find a concrete answer backed with facts. The skepticism lies with Meyer’s two topics that were mentioned to prove his rationale. Coming with a similar background of both Dr. Bernal and Pannell, the idea of nano-machinery and digital code within DNA poses some questions. While yes, one can consider these small protein complexes as machinery, Meyer’s perception of nano-machinery, stating that they were only made for that one specific task, seems to go against most of scientific discoveries.
As another great thinker, Galileo Galilei, once said, “The bible tells us how to go to heaven, not how the heavens go” (as cited in Hummel, 1986, p. 9). The contribution of science is invaluable as the bible does not explain, “how the heavens go.” The bible does explain “how