Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

How Future Scholars Will View Evolution

Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

Centuries from now, here is how a history book is likely to describe the theory of evolution:

As with many new paradigms, evolutionary thought developed over a lengthy period. Within the period known as Modern Science, which had its beginnings in the middle of the second millennium, evolutionary thought began to emerge in the mid seventeenth century. At that time theologians and philosophers from various traditions strenuously argued that the world must have arisen via strictly naturalistic processes. These schools of thought contributed to what became known as The Enlightenment period in the eighteenth century which marked a major turning point in Western intellectual thought.

In The Enlightenment period theological and metaphysical positions became codified in Western thought. These positions became sufficiently accepted and familiar so as to be no longer in need of justification. Instead, Western thinking rapidly incorporated these positions as new truths. This new theology made strong commitments in the area of divine intent, action, and interaction with creation. The impact on science was profound as this theology mandated that God’s interactions with the world was to be strictly via secondary causes (i.e., natural laws), and that all of history must be governed solely by such causes. This paradigm later became known as Evolutionary Thought.

In Evolutionary Thought, science implicitly incorporated these theological and metaphysical commitments. Western, and by now worldwide, thought entered a dark age of anti intellectualism in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. In this period all findings were described as evolutionary. Needless to say this was cause for ever more strained explanations of the evidence. Nonetheless, a rigid social and financial structure enforced adherence, complete with implicit penalties and harassment of dissenters.

Continued here

Comments
Nakashima: Reread the post, asking yourself this question: Why do I believe this historical review describes Evolutionary Thought as entailing metaphysical naturalism?Cornelius Hunter
June 6, 2009
June
06
Jun
6
06
2009
07:42 AM
7
07
42
AM
PDT
Cornelius, Nice to see that you are posting at UD now, hope you keep doing this. Your "history" is pretty accurate, but do you REALLY believe this is what will be written? It's hard to predict the future, I think it's entirely possible you are right, it's also possible you are overly optimistic (especially "its demise in the early 21st century"!). Discredited ideas have an amazing ability to hang around, when enough people want to believe them.Granville Sewell
June 6, 2009
June
06
Jun
6
06
2009
07:11 AM
7
07
11
AM
PDT
Nakashima, Who holds the difference between methodological naturalism and metaphysical naturalism? Certainly not any of the anti ID people who come here. So what are you trying to say, that you have a fantasy that there is a difference for a lot of people. Hunter has written a couple books on this topic so to satisfy your fantasies you should read more about it.jerry
June 6, 2009
June
06
Jun
6
06
2009
07:06 AM
7
07
06
AM
PDT
Nakashima, Did you read the last paragraph beyond the "Continued here"? If you did, I would have expected a rebuttal instead of a cheap shot.sterusjon
June 6, 2009
June
06
Jun
6
06
2009
06:56 AM
6
06
56
AM
PDT
Wow! A fantasy in which methodological naturalism is confused with metaphysical naturalism and then mislabelled Evolutionary Thought - have you thought of sending this to the textbook committee in Texas?Nakashima
June 6, 2009
June
06
Jun
6
06
2009
05:00 AM
5
05
00
AM
PDT
1 3 4 5

Leave a Reply