|
| |
Theological Arguments by Naturalists
Papers examining the essential use of theological arguments in support of
naturalism.
If that sounds strange, you are correct!
Chris Cosans,
Was Darwin a Creationist? (cc)
Throughout the Origin of Species, Darwin contrasts his
theory of natural selection with the theory that God independently created
each species. This makes it seem as though the Origin offers a scientific
alternative to a theological worldview. A few months after the Origin
appeared, however, the eminent anatomist Richard Owen published a review
that pointed out the theological assumptions of Darwin’s theory. Owen worked
in the tradition of rational morphology, within which one might suggest that
evolution occurs by processes that are continuous with those by which life
arises from matter; in contrast, Darwin rested his account of life’s origins
on the notion that God created one or a few life forms upon which natural
selection could act. Owen argued that Darwin’s reliance on God to explain
the origins of life makes his version of evolution no less supernatural than
the special creationist that Darwin criticizes: although Darwin limits God
to one or a few acts of creation, he still relies upon God to explain life’s
existence.
Stephen Dilley,
Charles Darwin’s use of theology in the Origin of Species, BJHS, 2011
[erratum] (cc)
This essay examines Darwin’s positiva (or positive)
use of theology in the first edition of the Origin of Species in
three steps. First, the essay analyses the Origin’s theological
language about God’s accessibility, honesty, methods of creating,
relationship to natural laws and lack of responsibility for natural
suffering; the essay contends that Darwin utilized positiva theology
in order to help justify (and inform) descent with modification and to
attack special creation. Second, the essay offers critical analysis of this
theology, drawing in part on Darwin’s mature ruminations to suggest that,
from an epistemic point of view, the Origin’s positiva
theology manifests several internal tensions. Finally, the essay reflects on
the relative epistemic importance of positiva theology in the
Origin’s overall case for evolution. The essay concludes that this
theology served as a handmaiden and accomplice to Darwin’s science.
Stephen Dilley,
Nothing in biology makes
sense except in light of theology?, Studies in History and Philosophy of
Biological and Biomedical Sciences, 2013 (cc)
This essay analyzes Theodosius Dobzhansky’s famous
article, ‘‘Nothing
in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution,’’ in which he
presents some of his best arguments for evolution. I contend that all of
Dobzhansky’s arguments hinge upon sectarian claims about God’s nature,
actions, purposes, or duties. Moreover, Dobzhansky’s theology manifests
several tensions, both in the epistemic justification of his theological
claims and in their collective coherence. I note that other prominent
biologists—such as Mayr, Dawkins, Eldredge, Ayala, de Beer, Futuyma, and
Gould—also use theology-laden arguments. I recommend increased analysis of
the justification, complexity, and coherence of this theology.
Cornelius Hunter,
Darwin’s Principle: The Use of Contrastive Reasoning in the Confirmation of
Evolution, HOPOS: The Journal of the International Society for the History
of Philosophy of Science, 2014 (cc)
I address Elliott Sober’s reconstruction of the
confirmation of evolution and offer a seemingly minor but important
correction. I then survey evolutionary thought in Darwin as well as both
before and after Darwin to demonstrate my modified reconstruction.
Finally, I explain how this correction reflects the richness of evolutionary
thought.
Adam Shapiro,
Darwin’s foil: The evolving uses of William Paley’s Natural Theology
1802–2005, Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical
Sciences, 2013 (cc)
This essay traces the divergent readings of William
Paley’s 1802 Natural Theology from its initial publication to the
recent controversies over intelligent design. It argues that the
misinterpretation of the Natural Theology as a scientific argument
about the origins of complex life—which Darwin’s Origin of Species
refutes—did not develop all at once. Rather this reading evolved gradually,
drawing from a variety of uses and appropriations during the course of the
nineteenth and twentieth centuries. This study demonstrates the fluidity of
‘‘science’’ and ‘‘religion’’ during these centuries, and highlights the role
that genres of science popularization play in altering the meaning of those
categories.
|
