- Mar 14, 2023
- 690
- 318
- 68
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Private
As the core intelligent Design authors point out, "evolution" as used by the hard sciences is based on random mutation.
In original Darwinism, mutation was taken to be happening in the whole biological organism.
In Neo-Darwinism, mutation was taken to happen in the DNA of biological organisms.
Both versions of "evolution" also include natural selection, of the most survivable organisms. (This is in one sense, an unfalsifiable concept. Whatever organisms survive, are said to be the most fit to survive.)
The arguments of the core Intelligent Design authors, is that randomness is not strong enough to produce the complex information that we see in biological organisms. and especially in DNA patterns, and molecular machines. This is a probabilistic argument, based on available resources.
I point out this dependency on randomness, because probability theory (and Computer science) uses the analysis of the power of randomness, to delineate what is probable, and what is not probable, and what is computable (in algorithms), and what is not computable.
Other definitions of "evolution" are not what the hard sciences are formally using.
There are all sorts of people discussing "evolution" as if it is an undefined process of how something, somehow, changes. But the scientific definition of evolution is based on randomness.
As an after-comment, required Christian doctrine (such as the Nicene Creed) requires only that we believe in God, maker of the heavens and the earth. There are no core Christian doctrines that require us to believe that a specific hard scientific model of "evolution" is true (that is, HOW God created the heavens and the earth). Before about 1900 (and Darwin's theory), we do not find Western Christians worried about HOW God created the heavens and the earth. It was not a core topic in Christian discussion. I suggest that modern Christians should return to that position.
As an after-comment, all the core Intelligent Design authors hold to an old earth model.
In original Darwinism, mutation was taken to be happening in the whole biological organism.
In Neo-Darwinism, mutation was taken to happen in the DNA of biological organisms.
Both versions of "evolution" also include natural selection, of the most survivable organisms. (This is in one sense, an unfalsifiable concept. Whatever organisms survive, are said to be the most fit to survive.)
The arguments of the core Intelligent Design authors, is that randomness is not strong enough to produce the complex information that we see in biological organisms. and especially in DNA patterns, and molecular machines. This is a probabilistic argument, based on available resources.
I point out this dependency on randomness, because probability theory (and Computer science) uses the analysis of the power of randomness, to delineate what is probable, and what is not probable, and what is computable (in algorithms), and what is not computable.
Other definitions of "evolution" are not what the hard sciences are formally using.
There are all sorts of people discussing "evolution" as if it is an undefined process of how something, somehow, changes. But the scientific definition of evolution is based on randomness.
As an after-comment, required Christian doctrine (such as the Nicene Creed) requires only that we believe in God, maker of the heavens and the earth. There are no core Christian doctrines that require us to believe that a specific hard scientific model of "evolution" is true (that is, HOW God created the heavens and the earth). Before about 1900 (and Darwin's theory), we do not find Western Christians worried about HOW God created the heavens and the earth. It was not a core topic in Christian discussion. I suggest that modern Christians should return to that position.
As an after-comment, all the core Intelligent Design authors hold to an old earth model.