Posted by: FLPatriot | March 3, 2009

Darwinists – So busy with the how they forget the why.

I had an epiphany this week end. My wife and I usually have very deep discussions on faith, life and what ever we are watching on tv at the moment. Our conversation went to how amazing it is that everything in the universe works perfectly so that life may exist on earth, yes we where watching the Discovery channel. Then it hit me, Evolutionist Scientists (or Darwinists for short) spend so much of their time trying to learn how something works so they can be amazed at how it does it they forget to be amazed at why it does it.

So often Darwinists, and a lot of Atheists also, tend to say that Christians are opposed to science, this is not true at all. A lot of the Christians I know love science, in fact we TiVo a lot of shows and specials on the Discovery channel and science channels. A lot of us are big fans of Gene Roddenberry and Isaac Asimov. But the big difference is that we care about the WHY.

So my challenge to all the Atheists that pass by this blog, stop for a moment and ponder why things work the way they do. I don’t mean to say that this works so that that can do it’s thing, thats more of how it does it. I mean to really think why do the planets circle the sun in a specific pattern and at a precise distance. Why does water evaporate into the clouds just to fall again as rain. There are so many questions like this that can help you see the real beauty in life.

Now my Christian brothers and sisters. My challenge to you and to do the same thing. Take time to look at nature and all the life around you and rejoice that God is in control of it all. Remember also that all this beauty on earth is but merely a shadow of what we will see once we are in heaven.


Responses

  1. How long have you been taking tap dance lessons Rickr0ll?

  2. the how/why argument holds no water. the planets circle the sun because of gravity. unless yoou can prove an almighty Creator, you are limited to asking why planets do what they do- a planet cannot answer because it is not alive. or sentient so therefore the only why is a relation of forces- the planet moves arount the sun because gravity forces an eliptical orbit.

  3. “he how/why argument holds no water.”, what argument? This is only an observation I made and wanted to see what others thought about it.

    “the planets circle the sun because of gravity.”, but they circle the sun at the perfect distance to allow life on earth, does that not amaze you? Do not wounder why that happened?

    My observation is that most atheists, or die hard evolutionists, do not consider why it happens and are satisfied with how it happens.

  4. > My observation is that most atheists, or die hard evolutionists, do not consider why it happens and are satisfied with how it happens.

    I think you need to understand the history of “why” and “how”. Back when science was not called “science”, people were interested in the why, so much that they did not accept the how easily, unless the why was first explained. This worked out quite badly with people inventing names of causes that were not truly causal explanations, to fill this requirement.

    De-emphasizing why began with Newton when he said that he could not explain why gravity worked but just how it worked. This was the major shift in science from the Cartesian philosophy of thinking to Newtonian philosophy. When pressed… Newton famously said – “I do not feign a hypothesis”.

    We all want to answer the why question. But when concrete data is not available, scientists prefer to label it as an unknown (for now), rather than emotionally gravitate to an explanation that is based on dogmatic preconceptions.

    As for you calling Evolution Scientists – Darwinists… it is inappropriate. A contemporary scientist primarily accepts evolution premises because of the mountain of evidence that has been uncovered since Darwin, not just by (and before) Darwin. Science is based on reason, not hero worship. The fact that it was a person named Darwin who first proposed this idea is of historical interest, but not a reason to accept the argument. To focus on Darwin while challenging Biological Evolution is to conveniently ignore (setting up a strawman) a VERY VERY large corpus of very compelling scientific literature.

    > tend to say that Christians are opposed to science

    Those who say Christians do not like science are ignorant of the history of science. Science in its early days was seen as a theological exercise – a way to raise the glory of God. All early scientists were religious and pursued science often for spiritual reasons. As science matured and we understood the world better, the intellectuals inevitably became deists and later on… atheists. These are intellectual positions that were appropriate at different times in human history dependent on the available body of knowledge.

    > in fact we TiVo a lot of shows and specials on the Discovery channel and science channels. A lot of us are big fans of Gene Roddenberry and Isaac Asimov. But the big difference is that we care about the WHY.

    And I am speaking as an actual scientist, not an arm-chair enthusiast (no dis-respect intended). Getting to know why needs more work, data and analysis… not recreational pontification. That never got us nowhere.

    These answers may eventually come, but I won’t bet that they will in our lifetime although we will surely get closer. So be prepared to end your life (along with me) without knowing all the answers, but at least knowing that you know what you don’t know. The alternative is a world of illusion.

  5. Type: That never got us nowhere.

    Read as: That never got us anywhere.

  6. Nice catch of the double negative🙂

    James, that was a well thought out and articulate answer. I really appreciated the fact you did not resort to name calling, that gives you points higher degree of integrity and more impact. I hope you will return to comment on future posts on this blog.

    I am proud to be an “arm-chair enthusiast” all though I think “computer chair enthusiast” is more accurate. I wish more Americans would at least take that level of interest in the sciences. I guess I am not in need to have a definitive answer to “why” as you may be to the “how”.

    “These answers may eventually come, but I won’t bet that they will in our lifetime although we will surely get closer.” I would phrase this as all answers will eventually be known to us, it may not be during my time on earth but I wouldn’t mind it if it did. I am comfortable with the idea that not all the “why” or “how” questions will be answered in my lifetime, I am amazed at the amount of “hows” we have uncovered so far. I am more amazed by how much bigger the “why” gets the more I learn about the “how”.

    Last thing, I have a whole post about the Darwinist label so explain more (mainly because it would take us off topic here to discuss it) but I do not mean disrespect by it, but there are a lot of people that single out creation scientists, Christian scientists, but then use scientists as a generic title. So I find it very appropriate to direct my comments at Darwinian scientists so there is no confusion over which segment of the scientific community I am directing my question towards.

    Again, thank you for your wonderful input and I look forward to hearing more from you.

  7. I’m glad that you took it constructively.

    > I am proud to be an “arm-chair enthusiast”

    Just to clarify, I am not belittling an arm-chair enthusiast. Since life is too short to pursue all our interests actively, we are all arm-chair enthusiasts in one thing or the other. What I was saying however was that those with passive interest should defer from passing judgment. These things are just too complex to assimilate in leisure.

    I’m not a physicist. But I suppose I could say that I am an arm-chair enthusiast in Physics. I find the notion of time travel silly and fit only for fictional works. It simply goes beyond my sensibilities. However, if I ever sat down with a theoretical physicist that accepted it, I would not challenge him on that (not even in a polite and intellectual way) because although all the data that led him to that position is available to me, I was not willing to make that investment in time and effort needed to understand it well enough; and that disqualifies me from an equal position in a debate.

    > I look forward to hearing more from you

    I appreciate your hospitality. I generally stay away from these discussions. I have not as of yet seen a single poster change their position based on the arguments presented on either side, here or elsewhere. So I do not find them productive. All they seem to serve is to flare resentment about the other group. I do however occasionally stray from my discipline and make a post like the one earlier.

    In this information age, debates should be reserved for bleeding-edge arguments. All the arguments in the posts have been made systematically, a number of times before in writing; and there is little reason to initiate yet another public combative discourse to rehash them.

    If you’re genuinely interested in finding more about this, a blog discussion is not the best way to go about it. Pick a couple of comprehensive books with good reviews on history of science and philosophy of science and read them in entirety without being too attracted to whatever sections they might have on the origin of life. They will provide a better foundation to interpret the issues on your blog.

  8. To add:

    I think all those who dismiss religion, esp Christianity, is a bigoted, anti-knowledge dogma should read about its rich intellectual history (starting from St Augustine) and philosophy from an academic, non-religious text, even if to only disagree with it.

    However, Christians also owe it to themselves to make a systematic study of comparative religion before they claim to understand their own religion.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories

%d bloggers like this: