It is simply not true. Actually, it is just a fairy tale for adults based on ancient pagan religious philosophy that hundreds of millions of people around the world choose to believe with blind faith.
If human beings are a result of the evolutionary process then one needs to maintain that the main purpose of our cognitive faculties is for survival and reproductive fitness. Evolution only cares whether or not our actions are adaptive and whether or not they contribute to our fitness.
Therefore, the naturalist would be incorrect to expect that his faculties would be aimed at truth as they would solely be aimed at fitness. Now, the implications for the naturalist are significant. This would undermine the trustworthiness of the human cognitive faculty as atheists themselves such as Friedrich Nietzsche and Thomas Nagel have noted.
Even Charles Darwin, the mind who established that all species of life descended over time from common ancestors, likewise saw this dilemma: They are not immaterial souls that have a body.
Now suppose we think about some creatures on an alien planet that are a lot like us. What causes their behaviour will be neurology, the states of which their neurons are firing sending a signal down to a muscle causing it to contract.
And their beliefs and the content of these beliefs are also caused by neurology. Now given that evolution is true these creatures have come into being by virtue of natural selection we can take it for granted that their behaviour is adaptive, it enhances their fitness which leads to survival and reproduction.
If that is true the same thing will go for what causes their behaviour, namely their neurology which also promotes survival and reproduction.
If their neurology causes the right behaviour what they believe makes no difference. If the neurology causes false beliefs but causes the right actions it makes no difference whatsoever.
Mechanisms of belief formation that have selective advantage in the everyday struggle for existence do not warrant our confidence in the construction of theoretical accounts of the world as a whole. The human cognitive faculty cannot be trusted to produce more true beliefs than false beliefs.
Thus to assert that naturalistic evolution is true the naturalist also asserts that one has a low or unknown probability of being right.
If evolution is true, which the vast majority of naturalists believe to be the case, then ascribing truth to naturalism and evolution is dubious or inconsistent.But we have to explain macro-evolution, so we surmise that enough micro-evolution must somehow turn into macro-evolution, because it just has to.
Finding a progression of species is an argument for both evolution and creation we are similar to chimpanzees by design, one might say, as they encounter the same atmosphere, food supply, etc. . In the ongoing war between creation and evolution, Christians are always looking for the strongest evidence for creation.
They are looking for the “magic bullet” that will prove to their evolutionist friends that creation is true and evolution is false. This craving for evidence has led some.
|Big Issues||The Theory of Evolution will never become a law of science because it is wrought with errors. This is why it is still called a theory, instead of a law.|
|The Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism. | James Bishop's Theological Rationalism||Pro I'm new at Debate.|
|The Thoughts of a Theology Student on the Big Questions that Matter!||Con The reason I think that Creationism is not correct is rather simple.|
In conclusion of my first argument, science does not disprove creationism and does not prove evolution, and at an even more fundamental level, logic disproves and does not allow for evolution.
Creationism is common sense and is more probable to be true given the evidence. Read the pros and cons of the debate Evolution: True? DEBATES. OPINIONS. FORUMS. POLLS. Google Search. My Debates. Start a New Debate. Such minute changes allowed the population to explode proving to be a change that was beneficial to its environment.
Now I will refute each argument with this in mind. 1. Evolution is not supposed to. 15 Answers to Creationist Nonsense. not evolution. This “argument from design” is the backbone of most recent attacks on evolution, but it is also one of the oldest.
What is true of. Proof Evolution Is False This book presents proof evolution is false. Specifically, it shows that naturalistic evolution is an inadequate explanation for the origin of (1) the universe, (2) life and (3) human life and that the cause of these three areas must be intelligent.