I have a thought experiment, and it involves the philosophy of science:
What if we had started out as Darwinists in Western history? What if humans had always believed that chance and various unpredictable situations would have given us everything we could possibly know?
The irony is this: if we had started out as Darwinists, we likely wouldn't have science. The fundamental assumptions of science is that the universe is orderly, rational, and measurable. Fundamentally, if one had started as a Darwinist without the prior influence of other worldviews that maintain orderliness and rationality, it's doubtful that that person would have ever thought to test the world or its biological underpinnings, because it all happened by chance anyhow. Darwinism implodes by its own philosophy.
What would it have mattered if the universe was measurable? Nobody would have done it. I think many people forget that modern science had it's birth in a Christian worldview. We believe in a God who has ordered the universe, making himself knowable through order, rationality, and measurability.
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Posts
1 comment:
Good point. I also wonder what it would be like if Darwinism, or at least Neo-Darwinism, was not so dogmatic (in the bad sense) about being anti-supernatural. Most scientists who are all about Darwinism today are in fact naturalists. I wonder what would happen if scientists actually remembered the roots of science, starting with Christian worldview intentions as you say, and adopting supernatural POSSIBILITIES into scientific explanations. That's all we're looking for, is making the conclusion of an experiement open to the possibility that supernatural efforts are being played out. But alas, Neo-Darwinism and anti-supernaturalism still win the day, so far.
Post a Comment