What should I think about Intelligent Design?

[catholictiger]

Not so. The Church, not science, has the final say. This age of the earth issue has nothing to do with science. That much is obvious - at least here.

Peace,
Ed

The Church has final say on scientific matters?

the age of earth has everything to do with science, what reasons would you have to think other wise?

 

[Al_Moritz]

The Church has final say on scientific matters?

the age of earth has everything to do with science, what reasons would you have to think other wise?

Indeed, rather than having the final say in science matters, the Church cites science. From the document COMMUNION AND STEWARDSHIP: Human Persons Created in the Image of God:

Science and the stewardship of knowledge

1. The endeavor to understand the universe has marked human culture in every period and in nearly every society. In the perspective of the Christian faith, this endeavor is precisely an instance of the stewardship which human beings exercise in accordance with God’s plan. Without embracing a discredited concordism, Christians have the responsibility to locate the modern scientific understanding of the universe within the context of the theology of creation. The place of human beings in the history of this evolving universe, as it has been charted by modern sciences, can only be seen in its complete reality in the light of faith, as a personal history of the engagement of the triune God with creaturely persons.
2. According to the widely accepted scientific account, the universe erupted 15 billion years ago in an explosion called the “Big Bang” and has been expanding and cooling ever since. Later there gradually emerged the conditions necessary for the formation of atoms, still later the condensation of galaxies and stars, and about 10 billion years later the formation of planets. In our own solar system and on earth (formed about 4.5 billion years ago), the conditions have been favorable to the emergence of life. While there is little consensus among scientists about how the origin of this first microscopic life is to be explained, there is general agreement among them that the first organism dwelt on this planet about 3.5-4 billion years ago. Since it has been demonstrated that all living organisms on earth are genetically related, it is virtually certain that all living organisms have descended from this first organism. Converging evidence from many studies in the physical and biological sciences furnishes mounting support for some theory of evolution to account for the development and diversification of life on earth, while controversy continues over the pace and mechanisms of evolution. While the story of human origins is complex and subject to revision, physical anthropology and molecular biology combine to make a convincing case for the origin of the human species in Africa about 150,000 years ago in a humanoid population of common genetic lineage. However it is to be explained, the decisive factor in human origins was a continually increasing brain size, culminating in that of homo sapiens. With the development of the human brain, the nature and rate of evolution were permanently altered: with the introduction of the uniquely human factors of consciousness, intentionality, freedom and creativity, biological evolution was recast as social and cultural evolution.

 

[Aloysium]

The Church has final say on scientific matters?

the age of earth has everything to do with science, what reasons would you have to think other wise?

:twocents:

time is weird

if you think of all the massive changes that the universe underwent in the first 1/100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 ths of a second right after the Big Bang was initiated, you have to concede that while one may arrive at workable theoretical numbers, it does stretch human imagination to appreciate what actually transpires in reality.

contemplating time, tends to twist me around mentally:

• here i am, feeling like i am riding the crest of time as it ever surges into the future
• events coming into being and fading away
• as persons, it makes sense that time has to be ever fresh,new, potential becoming actuality, if we are to have free-will and thereby participate in the creation of our destinies
• but does this limitless universe unfold with me as i myself unfold in this ever-present now?
• i currently think not, and that the only way events in the universe can be said to be co-incident, is if all events, in all times are one
• our existence is finite and therefore our lives appear as moments coming into being in relation to the whole, which emerges through God’s act of being in eternity

time-space reveals the beauty and sheer awesomeness of our Creator and our experience/involvement in it reveals our existence as spiritual being rooted in eternity

While science provides information regarding the structure of the physical universe, the Church provides us with an understanding of its meaning and significance.

 

[catholictiger]

general note to everyone

I was talking to my friend about this idea of God as a creator and not a designer, and after talking to him, while he kinda agreed with me, I noticed that my understanding of this stuff is very limited so take what I said about God not being a designer with a grain of salt.

I may read this book amazon.com/God-After-Darwin-Theology-Evolution/dp/0813343704/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1366934514&sr=8-1&keywords=god+after+darwin

my teacher brought up this book when talking about this issue.

sorry if I confused anyone, I’m still trying to rap my head around this topic. I was mainly just playing the argument out to see how it works.

 

[Linusthe2nd]

general note to everyone

I was talking to my friend about this idea of God as a creator and not a designer, and after talking to him, while he kinda agreed with me, I noticed that my understanding of this stuff is very limited so take what I said about God not being a designer with a grain of salt.

I may read this book amazon.com/God-After-Darwin-Theology-Evolution/dp/0813343704/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1366934514&sr=8-1&keywords=god+after+darwin

my teacher brought up this book when talking about this issue.

sorry if I confused anyone, I’m still trying to rap my head around this topic. I was mainly just playing the argument out to see how it works.

We are all on the same spiritual and intellectual journey. Linus2nd

 

[edwest2]

Indeed, rather than having the final say in science matters, the Church cites science. From the document COMMUNION AND STEWARDSHIP: Human Persons Created in the Image of God:

Science and the stewardship of knowledge

1. The endeavor to understand the universe has marked human culture in every period and in nearly every society. In the perspective of the Christian faith, this endeavor is precisely an instance of the stewardship which human beings exercise in accordance with God’s plan. Without embracing a discredited concordism, Christians have the responsibility to locate the modern scientific understanding of the universe within the context of the theology of creation. The place of human beings in the history of this evolving universe, as it has been charted by modern sciences, can only be seen in its complete reality in the light of faith, as a personal history of the engagement of the triune God with creaturely persons.
2. According to the widely accepted scientific account, the universe erupted 15 billion years ago in an explosion called the “Big Bang” and has been expanding and cooling ever since. Later there gradually emerged the conditions necessary for the formation of atoms, still later the condensation of galaxies and stars, and about 10 billion years later the formation of planets. In our own solar system and on earth (formed about 4.5 billion years ago), the conditions have been favorable to the emergence of life. While there is little consensus among scientists about how the origin of this first microscopic life is to be explained, there is general agreement among them that the first organism dwelt on this planet about 3.5-4 billion years ago. Since it has been demonstrated that all living organisms on earth are genetically related, it is virtually certain that all living organisms have descended from this first organism. Converging evidence from many studies in the physical and biological sciences furnishes mounting support for some theory of evolution to account for the development and diversification of life on earth, while controversy continues over the pace and mechanisms of evolution. While the story of human origins is complex and subject to revision, physical anthropology and molecular biology combine to make a convincing case for the origin of the human species in Africa about 150,000 years ago in a humanoid population of common genetic lineage. However it is to be explained, the decisive factor in human origins was a continually increasing brain size, culminating in that of homo sapiens. With the development of the human brain, the nature and rate of evolution were permanently altered: with the introduction of the uniquely human factors of consciousness, intentionality, freedom and creativity, biological evolution was recast as social and cultural evolution.

“According to” is not the Church. It is a reference to what science is saying. And science does not contain the fullness of the truth.

From the same document:

“69. The current scientific debate about the mechanisms at work in evolution requires theological comment insofar as it sometimes implies a misunderstanding of the nature of divine causality. Many neo-Darwinian scientists, as well as some of their critics, have concluded that, if evolution is a radically contingent materialistic process driven by natural selection and random genetic variation, then there can be no place in it for divine providential causality. A growing body of scientific critics of neo-Darwinism point to evidence of design (e.g., biological structures that exhibit specified complexity) that, in their view, cannot be explained in terms of a purely contingent process and that neo-Darwinians have ignored or misinterpreted. The nub of this currently lively disagreement involves scientific observation and generalization concerning whether the available data support inferences of design or chance, and cannot be settled by theology. But it is important to note that, according to the Catholic understanding of divine causality, true contingency in the created order is not incompatible with a purposeful divine providence. Divine causality and created causality radically differ in kind and not only in degree. Thus, even the outcome of a truly contingent natural process can nonetheless fall within God’s providential plan for creation. According to St. Thomas Aquinas: “The effect of divine providence is not only that things should happen somehow, but that they should happen either by necessity or by contingency. Therefore, whatsoever divine providence ordains to happen infallibly and of necessity happens infallibly and of necessity; and that happens from contingency, which the divine providence conceives to happen from contingency” (Summa theologiae, I, 22,4 ad 1). In the Catholic perspective, neo-Darwinians who adduce random genetic variation and natural selection as evidence that the process of evolution is absolutely unguided are straying beyond what can be demonstrated by science. Divine causality can be active in a process that is both contingent and guided. Any evolutionary mechanism that is contingent can only be contingent because God made it so. An unguided evolutionary process – one that falls outside the bounds of divine providence – simply cannot exist because “the causality of God, Who is the first agent, extends to all being, not only as to constituent principles of species, but also as to the individualizing principles…It necessarily follows that all things, inasmuch as they participate in existence, must likewise be subject to divine providence” (Summa theologiae I, 22, 2).”

Peace,
Ed

 

[Al_Moritz]

“According to” is not the Church. It is a reference to what science is saying.

And the Church does not indicate in any way that the scientific findings that it cites contradict faith.

From the same document:

“69. The current scientific debate about the mechanisms at work in evolution requires theological comment insofar as it sometimes implies a misunderstanding of the nature of divine causality. Many neo-Darwinian scientists, as well as some of their critics, have concluded that, if evolution is a radically contingent materialistic process driven by natural selection and random genetic variation, then there can be no place in it for divine providential causality. A growing body of scientific critics of neo-Darwinism point to evidence of design (e.g., biological structures that exhibit specified complexity) that, in their view, cannot be explained in terms of a purely contingent process and that neo-Darwinians have ignored or misinterpreted. The nub of this currently lively disagreement involves scientific observation and generalization concerning whether the available data support inferences of design or chance, and cannot be settled by theology. But it is important to note that, according to the Catholic understanding of divine causality, true contingency in the created order is not incompatible with a purposeful divine providence. Divine causality and created causality radically differ in kind and not only in degree. Thus, even the outcome of a truly contingent natural process can nonetheless fall within God’s providential plan for creation. According to St. Thomas Aquinas: “The effect of divine providence is not only that things should happen somehow, but that they should happen either by necessity or by contingency. Therefore, whatsoever divine providence ordains to happen infallibly and of necessity happens infallibly and of necessity; and that happens from contingency, which the divine providence conceives to happen from contingency” (Summa theologiae, I, 22,4 ad 1). In the Catholic perspective, neo-Darwinians who adduce random genetic variation and natural selection as evidence that the process of evolution is absolutely unguided are straying beyond what can be demonstrated by science. Divine causality can be active in a process that is both contingent and guided. Any evolutionary mechanism that is contingent can only be contingent because God made it so. An unguided evolutionary process – one that falls outside the bounds of divine providence – simply cannot exist because “the causality of God, Who is the first agent, extends to all being, not only as to constituent principles of species, but also as to the individualizing principles…It necessarily follows that all things, inasmuch as they participate in existence, must likewise be subject to divine providence” (Summa theologiae I, 22, 2).”

Peace,
Ed

Precisely. While attentive readers will notice in this paragraph that the Church criticizes the idea of evolution being an unguided process, instead of it falling under divine providence, they will also notice that the Church points out that the aspects of randomness and contingency within evolution are fully compatible with the idea that evolution falls under the guidance of God. In other words, the strict science of evolution, stripped from the unwarranted undertones and implications of worldview espoused by some scientists, is fully compatible with Church teaching and even with classical theology/philosophy, as the use of the Aquinas quote shows.

 

[edwest2]

And the Church does not indicate in any way that the scientific findings that it cites contradict faith.

Precisely. While attentive readers will notice in this paragraph that the Church criticizes the idea of evolution being an unguided process, instead of it falling under divine providence, they will also notice that the Church points out that the aspects of randomness and contingency within evolution are fully compatible with the idea that evolution falls under the guidance of God. In other words, the strict science of evolution, stripped from the unwarranted undertones and implications of worldview espoused by some scientists, is fully compatible with Church teaching and even with classical theology/philosophy, as the use of the Aquinas quote shows.

Guidance of God? Where? Pick up a Biology textbook. The entire process is completely unguided and except for a few ‘fortuitous’ twists and turns, man would not be here today. The entire process is ‘by accident only.’ Guidance? I don’t think so, according to science.

Peace,
Ed

 

[dshix]

Guidance of God? Where? Pick up a Biology textbook. The entire process is completely unguided and except for a few ‘fortuitous’ twists and turns, man would not be here today. The entire process is ‘by accident only.’ Guidance? I don’t think so, according to science.

Peace,
Ed

You misunderstand. The Catholic concept of “Evolution by Intelligent Design” is that the seemingly random “twists and turns” of evolution were guided by God to create a man. Essentially, science is making the claim that it occured by Blind Chance, but Catholics are saying it was guided and intended.

 

[Al_Moritz]

Guidance? I don’t think so, according to science.

Science can say nothing about guidance, one way or another. If scientists do so in the name of science, then they overstep the boundaries of science. But that is not a problem of science itself, but of individuals who do not understand/respect the boundaries between science and philosophy.

The definition of ‘random’ in mathematics and statistics is: “Of or relating to a type of circumstance or event that is described by a probability distribution”. (Source: The American Heritage Dictionaries.)

“Random” also means simply “by chance” (in German, for example, the scientific-technical equivalent of the word “random” is “zufällig” – which directly translates into “by chance”). The classical example of “randomness” is the game of dice.

Furthermore, “random” is used as “unpredictable”: quantum mechanics, for instance, does not predict the outcome of particular experiments, but only their probability distribution. In mathematical statistics on the other hand, “Prediction of random variables” is an important field.

Nowhere in science is random defined as ‘unguided’ or even ‘uncaused’.

 

[edwest2]

B]“[E]volution works without either plan or purpose — Evolution is random and undirected.”
(Biology, by Kenneth R. Miller & Joseph S. Levine (1st ed., Prentice Hall, 1991), pg. 658; (3rd ed., Prentice Hall, 1995), pg. 658; (4th ed., Prentice Hall, 1998), pg. 658; emphasis in original.)

“Humans represent just one tiny, largely fortuitous, and late-arising twig on the enormously arborescent bush of life.”
(Stephen J Gould quoted in Biology, by Peter H Raven & George B Johnson (5th ed., McGraw Hill, 1999), pg 15; (6th ed., McGraw Hill, 2000), pg. 16.)

Peace,
Ed

 

[Al_Moritz]

B]“[E]volution works without either plan or purpose — Evolution is random and undirected.”

(Biology, by Kenneth R. Miller & Joseph S. Levine (1st ed., Prentice Hall, 1991), pg. 658; (3rd ed., Prentice Hall, 1995), pg. 658; (4th ed., Prentice Hall, 1998), pg. 658; emphasis in original.)

“Humans represent just one tiny, largely fortuitous, and late-arising twig on the enormously arborescent bush of life.”
(Stephen J Gould quoted in Biology, by Peter H Raven & George B Johnson (5th ed., McGraw Hill, 1999), pg 15; (6th ed., McGraw Hill, 2000), pg. 16.)

Peace,
Ed

Ed, I am not going to be a partner in playing your game of insinuation that there is something wrong with science. I am a scientist myself, and I can safely say, there isn’t. As I just said in my previous post:

Science can say nothing about guidance, one way or another. If scientists do so in the name of science, then they overstep the boundaries of science. But that is not a problem of science itself, but of individuals who do not understand/respect the boundaries between science and philosophy.

 

[catholictiger]

You misunderstand. The Catholic concept of “Evolution by Intelligent Design” is that the seemingly random “twists and turns” of evolution were guided by God to create a man. Essentially, science is making the claim that it occured by Blind Chance, but Catholics are saying it was guided and intended.

I would slightly disagree with this

This is how I believe it occured (while my view is still being developed) (also please note the Catholic Church has no declared scientifically or really even philosophically how creation occured all we know is that God created the universe and we are created in him image and likeness.)

But God is the creator of the universe giving it direction laws purpose a final end and all that kinda stuff. After creating the cosmos God allows the natural process of nature occur. The universe evolves creating galaxies, stars solar, systems, planets, black holes, ect. The natural process of the universe evolving eventually caused the sun to form, the solar system to form, earth to form, life to form, and humans to form. All by the process of evolution and the natural unfolding of the universe. Even though the natural process is behind it all, Gods hand is still behind it and still working things to the way he wants. But in a way were all of the natural occurrences still happen and nothing supernatural needs to be explained to explain how humans came into this existence despite this God’s providence is behind it all.

I don’t know what you would categorize this as as far as philosophies go but this is what I hold to.

God allows natural things to take place but his hand is behind it all.

This happens in our own life very evidently. For example lets say you were running the Boston marathon and you would have been right at the finish line at the time of the explosion, but you tripped 4 miles into the race and was about 500 yards from the 2nd explosion. You claim that God’s hand was behind it all keeping me safe, even though you can give a natural explanation for why you were behind.

Another example you are a women discerning religious life but you can’t decide what order to enter. Then you are watching TV one day and see these sisters on a game show dominating at the bible. You look into the order and you fall in love with it and decide to enter it. Natural process of you seeing these sisters on TV but you again claim that God’s hand is behind it all.

the universe works the same way, there is nothing “supernatural” about the evolution of the universe, science will never have to explain that this here defies explanation there must be something supernatural. Every single occurrence in the evolution of the cosmos will be able to be explained by natural science. But God’s guiding hand is behind it all bringing about human beings, and their salvation. Granted God does use supernatural events for those who follow him, but I believe as far as the evolution of the cosmos goes there is nothing super natural.

 

[Aaron_Creagh]

Well, if you narrow it down to that, then evolution isn’t science either. In fact, there’s even less evidence for evolution than there is for ID.

hmm.

Interesting.

If evolution is proved to be 100% accurate, then it isn’t science.

I personally think it is still in it’s theory stage, myself.

 

[catholictiger]

hmm.

Interesting.

If evolution is proved to be 100% accurate, then it isn’t science.

I personally think it is still in it’s theory stage, myself.

no science even laws will ever be proven 100% accurate. It is nearly impossible to do so. Not even laws can be considered 100% accurate. Science does experiments and makes conclusions based of hypothesis and observations. When you have the same conclusion thousands of times in a row without any difference you can have a law. But even a law is open to the possibility of being changed, even though its probably as likely as being struck by lighting.

Evolution yes its a theory but so is almost every single thing in science there are only a few laws but hundreds of theories. Does anyone doubt a theory like gravity? Does anyone doubt this because it is a theory, or is it widely accepted that it is real we just can’t make it a law.

I believe evolution to be the same way. It has been proven pretty convincingly by science that this is the way things work. Yes its a theory but a theory is applied to almost every single thing in science, except things that have been verified thousands if not millions of times.

 

[Aloysium]

You misunderstand. The Catholic concept of “Evolution by Intelligent Design” is that the seemingly random “twists and turns” of evolution were guided by God to create a man. Essentially, science is making the claim that it occured by Blind Chance, but Catholics are saying it was guided and intended.

my understanding is different, seeing man emerging “outside” of evolution
there was an additional creative step that God took in making us
man is different from other animals, in that his is a spiritual soul, created in the image of God
we have free will, we fell and are redeemed
this is not part of the “evolutionary” process by which life emerged and flourished on earth

God breathed His spirit into us, we are eternal

 

[rossum]

no science even laws will ever be proven 100% accurate.

Correct. Even Newton’s “Laws” of gravity were overthrown by Einstein. Newton was almost, but not exactly, correct. Einstein was better, but is still not completely correct. We await a theory of Quantum Gravity, which will be better than Einstein but still not 100%.

Since science looks at the real world, and we do not yet know everything about the real world, then any scientific result can be modified by a new discovery. Hence science does not do “proof”, that is for mathematics. Science does evidence and accuracy.

Currently, the theory of gravity is accurate to about 8 decimal places. The theory of evolution is accurate to about 12 decimal places.

Intelligent Design (the American political version) has not yet produced enough scientific results to be able to measure how accurate it is. Theological ID is not in the arena of science so is not required to demonstrate scientific accuracy.

rossum

 

[catholictiger]

my understanding is different, seeing man emerging “outside” of evolution
there was an additional creative step that God took in making us
man is different from other animals, in that his is a spiritual soul, created in the image of God
we have free will, we fell and are redeemed
this is not part of the “evolutionary” process by which life emerged and flourished on earth

God breathed His spirit into us, we are eternal

I believe that Man came through evolution but then God took two homo sapiens and ensouled them and from those two all of mankind came to exist with souls.

 

[Al_Moritz]

But God is the creator of the universe giving it direction laws purpose a final end and all that kinda stuff. After creating the cosmos God allows the natural process of nature occur. The universe evolves creating galaxies, stars solar, systems, planets, black holes, ect. The natural process of the universe evolving eventually caused the sun to form, the solar system to form, earth to form, life to form, and humans to form. All by the process of evolution and the natural unfolding of the universe. Even though the natural process is behind it all, Gods hand is still behind it and still working things to the way he wants. But in a way were all of the natural occurrences still happen and nothing supernatural needs to be explained to explain how humans came into this existence despite this God’s providence is behind it all.

I fully agree with all of that. Except when it comes to humans: while the human body evolved as you describe, the immaterial rational soul obviously did not. Evolution is a material, physical process, and cannot produce souls. This is also unequivocal teaching of the Catholic Church.

Even though the natural process is behind it all, Gods hand is still behind it and still working things to the way he wants.

Indeed, God designed the universe and the fine-tuning of the laws of nature is a loud-screaming testimony to that.

the universe works the same way, there is nothing “supernatural” about the evolution of the universe, science will never have to explain that this here defies explanation there must be something supernatural. Every single occurrence in the evolution of the cosmos will be able to be explained by natural science. *But God’s guiding hand is behind it all bringing about human beings, and their salvation. *Granted God does use supernatural events for those who follow him, but I believe as far as the evolution of the cosmos goes there is nothing super natural.

Again, agreed, but once more with the caveat about humans, see the by me italicized text. Salvation could not be brought about by natural processes.

 

[Aloysium]

I believe that Man came through evolution but then God took two homo sapiens and ensouled them and from those two all of mankind came to exist with souls.

makes sense to me