Tuesday, April 22, 2008

D'Souza on Stein (on Dawkins)

From Dinesh D'Souza at TownHall.com on Ben Stein's coverage of Richard Dawkins in his new movie, Expelled...

In Ben Stein's new film "Expelled," there is a great scene where Richard Dawkins is going on about how evolution explains everything. This is part of Dawkins' grand claim, which echoes through several of his books, that evolution by itself has refuted the argument from design. The argument from design hold that the design of the universe and of life are most likely the product of an intelligent designer. Dawkins thinks that Darwin has disproven this argument.

So Stein puts to Dawkins a simple question, "How did life begin?" One would think that this is a question that could be easily answered. Dawkins, however, frankly admits that he has no idea. One might expect Dawkins to invoke evolution as the all-purpose explanation. Evolution, however, only explains transitions from one life form to another. Evolution has no explanation for how life got started in the first place. Darwin was very clear about this.

In order for evolution to take place, there had to be a living cell. The difficulty for atheists is that even this original cell is a work of labyrinthine complexity. Franklin Harold writes in The Way of the Cell that even the simplest cells are more ingeniously complicated than man's most elaborate inventions: the factory system or the computer. Moreover, Harold writes that the various components of the cell do not function like random widgets; rather, they work purposefully together, as if cooperating in a planned organized venture. Dawkins himself has described the cell as the kind of supercomputer, noting that it functions through an information system that resembles the software code.

Is it possible that living cells somehow assembled themselves from nonliving things by chance? The probabilities here are so infinitesimal that they approach zero....

And the absurdity was recognized more than a decade ago by Francis Crick, co-discoverer of the DNA double helix. Yet Crick is a committed atheist. Unwilling to consider the possibility of divine or supernatural creation, Crick suggested that maybe aliens brought life to earth from another planet. And this is precisely the suggestion that Richard Dawkins makes in his response to Ben Stein. Perhaps, he notes, life was delivered to our planet by highly-evolved aliens....

Stein brilliantly responds that he had no idea Richard Dawkins believes in intelligent design! And indeed Dawkins does seem to be saying that alien intelligence is responsible for life arriving on earth. What are we to make of this? Basically Dawkins is surrendering on the claim that evolution can account for the origins of life. It can't. The issue now is simply whether a natural intelligence (ET) or a supernatural intelligence (God) created life....

1 Comments:

At April 22, 2008 at 10:19 PM , Blogger William Lang said...

This is an interesting article, in spite of the fact that D'Souza is mistaken if if he thinks Dawkins really supports the aliens-did-it theory.

The simple fact is that no one knows how life began. Now the scientists are working on this problem. There are various theories (such as the theory that life began on a crystal of clay, mentioned in the movie), but none of these are satisfactory. It's possible that a reasonable non-ID solution will be found to this problem (we've only been working on this for the last 50 years or so: it must be emphasized how young molecular biology is as a science).

But to be honest, if God did it, it wouldn't particularly surprise me. (I believe that God used evolution to develop life on Earth. That is, I'm a theistic evolutionist. But if God was hands-off from the very beginning, or just after the very beginning, we can't be sure right now.)

One thing is clear to me, however: many contingent events determined the development of life on Earth. For example, it's now pretty clear from biochemistry that eukaryotic cells (cells with nuclei, as opposed to the much simpler bacteria) originated as symbiotic groups of bacteria. (This was established by Lynn Margulis, who bucked the traditional Darwinian emphasis on competition to develop her idea that cooperation and symbiosis are at least as important.) So we see less "design" and more "chance", at least after life appeared. But unless we hold to too literal a reading of Genesis, this does not contradict Christian theology in the slightest. I believe that God wanted a system of life that evolved by itself, partly because it's a sure route to a living world that is adaptable to changing conditions, and partly for the unpredictable and breathtaking beauty that is produced. It's simply an elegant way of doing things, if indeed God is behind it all.

 

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home