Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Birth of civilization
“Where did that come from?” Is an innocuous enough question in mundane circumstances, but when applied to something as complex as the human race – and by proxy, to all life – the issue becomes incredibly clouded. The argument that humans and the material universe they inhabit resulted from the conscious and deliberate actions of an outside entity can sound at least passably convincing, even if one is determined to accept biological evolution as an established fact. It is fairly easy to dismiss literal Biblical creationism as irrelevant and/or inappropriate for the discussion of science, but it is harder to object to the formulation of a more sophisticated view that the universe’s form and structure shows signs of having been designed.
To understand the fundamental logic behind intelligent design, consider the rational mind’s instinctive reaction to two different events: If Bob were to win the lottery when the odds of doing so were one-in-one-billion, rational minds are not immediately tempted to think that Bob somehow cheated in order to win. But if Bob were to win several consecutive lotteries set at odds of one-in-one-thousand, it becomes increasingly more tempting to accuse Bob of cheating. The structure of the latter scenario is such that it justifies a belief that cheating was involved: Bob getting lucky in one lottery is consistent with the contest’s inherent randomness, but getting lucky in three consecutive lotteries is a reliable indicator that Bob’s victories were the intended result of someone’s intelligent input into what was intended to be a random system. Despite the probability of winning three consecutive one-in-one-thousand games being exactly the same as the probability of winning a single one-in-one-billion gam...
... middle of paper ...
... universe and the evidence that we can observe with our own two eyes both appear to point to the deliberate intervention of a cognizant, intelligent being somewhere in humanity’s distant past. Whether this agent was in fact the monotheistic God, a pantheon of gods and goddesses, extraterrestrials, or something else entirely remains up for debate, but the simple fact is that human life is simply too ingenious and complicated to have arisen by dint of evolution alone.
References:
1. George N. Schlesinger, New Perspectives on Old-time Religion (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1988)
2. Michael J. Behe, Darwin’s Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution (New York: Touchstone Books, 1996)
3. Gee, H., In Search of Deep Time: Beyond the Fossil Record to a New History of life (1999).
4. Scherer, S., "Basic Types of Life" in Mere Creation, edited by Dembski 195-211 (1998).
There are different viewpoints on the question “what is the universe made of?” I think that both science and religion offer their own explanation to this topic and they sometimes overlap, which creates contradictions. Therefore, I do not agree with Stephen Jay Gould’s non-overlapping magisterial, which claims that there is a fine line separating science from religion. That being said, I think the conflict between science and religion is only in the study of evolution. It is possible for a scientist to be religious if he is not studying evolution, because science is very broad and it has various studies. In this essay, I will talk about the conflict between religion and science by comparing the arguments from Stephen Jay Gould and Richard Dawkins. I argue that science and religion do overlap but only in some area concerning evolution and the cosmic design. Furthermore, when these overlaps are present it means that there are conflicts and one must choose between science and religion.
Zhao, Buyun. "Charles Darwin & Evolution." Charles Darwin & Evolution. Christ's College, 2009. Web. 04 May 2014.
The claims of rationality and the so-called scientific approach of the atheists and agnostics have been debunked. In the coming pages we shall see that both in the creation of the universe, in things created within the universe and in the creation of living beings, an intelligently designed process is going on, and we shall demonstrate that the objections of agnostics and skeptics to this assertion are merely delusions.
Bowler, Peter J. Evolution: The History of an Idea. London: University of California Press, 1989.
Purves,William K., et al. Life: The Science of Biology Sixth Edition. Massachusetts: Sinauer Assoicates, Inc. 2001.
6. Wright, Richard T., Biology Through the Eyes of Faith. San Francisco, Harper Collins Publisher, 1989
Morris, Henry. "Where Evolution has Gaps, Creation Might Offer Answers – If we will Listen." usnews.com. U.S.News & World Report, 2 Feb. 2009. Web. 21 Mar. 2012.
Paley, William. “Natural Theology,” in Introduction to Philosophy. 6th edition. Perry, Bratman, and Fischer. Oxford University Press. 2013, pp. 47-51.
Darwin, Charles. From The Origin of Species. New York: P.F. Collier and Son Corporation, 1937. 71-86; 497-506.
“The ascent of money has led to the ascent of man.”. The greatest question many have sought to answer is the creation vs. evolution debate. How did we get here? Were we created or did we evolve randomly?
1996 "What Is a Species, and What Is Not?" Philosophy of Science, Vol. 63, No. 2: 262-277.
“The greatest mystery of existence is existence itself” (Chopra). Chopra, a world-renowned author, perceives the existence of life as a truly mystifying cerebration. The pending question that many scientist, and even theists, attempt to answer is how life ultimately began. Currently, the mystery is left with two propositions, evolution and creation. While both approaches attempt to answer the origins of life, evolution and creation are two contrasting concepts. Evolution views life to be a process by which organisms diversified from earlier forms whereas creation illustrates that life was created by a supernatural being. Creation and evolution both agree on the existence of microevolution and the resemblance of apes and humans but vary in terms of interpreting the origins of the life through a historical standpoint. A concept known as Faith Vs Fact comprehensively summarizes the tone of this debate, which leads the question of how life began.
Talking on both sides of the debate, each side feels as though the other has no scientific reasoning come up with their theory. In reading the article written by Shipman, the evolutionists believe that intelligent design has no concrete evidence on how the world was crea...
Up until the Enlightenment, mankind lived under the notion that religion, moreover intelligent design, was most likely the only explanation for the existence of life. However, people’s faith in the church’s ideals and teachings began to wither with the emergence of scientific ideas that were daringly presented to the world by great minds including Galileo and Darwin. The actuality that there was more to how and why we exist, besides just having an all-powerful creator, began to interest the curious minds in society. Thus, science began to emerge as an alternative and/or supplement to religion for some. Science provided a more analytical view of the world we see while religion was based more upon human tradition/faith and the more metaphysical world we don’t necessarily see. Today science may come across as having more solid evidence and grounding than religion because of scientific data that provides a seemingly more detailed overview of life’s complexity. “Einstein once said that the only incomprehensible thing about the universe is that it is comprehensible” (Polkinghorne, 62). Yet, we can still use theories and ideas from both, similar to Ian Barbour’s Dialouge and Integration models, to help us formulate an even more thorough concept of the universe using a human and religious perspective in addition to scientific data.
Since the dawn of intelligent man, humanity has speculated about the origins of the universe.