Evolution Chapter 7

Evolution: “when science trumps faith”. (pp159) Chapter 7 discusses evolution in the most literal sense possible: the creation of earth and life without any assistance from God. As one might imagine, it is centered on the teachings of Dawkins, whose stance on evolution is clear and unforgiving. Dawkins starts out with the argument that “evolution fully accounts for biological complexity and the origins of humankind, so there is no more need for God.” (pp163) I enjoyed Collins’ quick and cunning response: “it certainly does not disprove the idea that God worked out His creative plan by means of evolution.” (pp163-164) Booyah, one point to Collins. Here we have an infamous atheistic scientist who argues that evolution is able to account for all …show more content…
Upon completion of chapter 8, I thought: “yes. Intelligent Design, when science needs diving help, this is completely what Collins is advocating for.” I was wrong again. Intelligent Design is a means to explain the incredible complexity of today’s world. Collins presents the three main propositions of Intelligent Design: “Evolution promotes an atheistic worldview”, “evolution is fundamentally flawed, since it cannot account for the intricate complexity of nature.” And “if evolution cannot explain irreducible complexity, then there must have been an intelligent designer involved somehow who stepped in to provide the necessary components during the course of evolution.” (pp183, 184, and 186, respectively.) Essentially, Intelligent Design argues that since evolution itself couldn’t possibly lead to the complexity we find today, God had to have stepped in and led the way. Collins, again, destroys this idea. He states “ID proponents have made the mistake of confusing the unknown with the unknowable, or the unsolved with the unsolvable.” (pp188) What’s the argument against Intelligent Design? Easy: how can you prove that evolution needed the help of God? (You cant.) From a critiquing standpoint, I must admit that Collins has forgotten about the most basic argument for Intelligent Design: How can you say that something would be better if it existed another way, if you have never seen it exist the other way, and have no means of comparing the efficiency of the two. I wish Collins had touched upon this idea. Collins does touch upon the idea, in conclusion, that a “God of the gaps” religion runs a risk of discrediting faith, and allows faith to be a crutch that can be used when science fails.