Darwinism vs. ID vs. Evolution 2.0

Issue

Neo-Darwinism

Intelligent Design

Evolution 2.0 (a.k.a. Third Way, Extended Synthesis)

Origin of Life

Presumed to have emerged from random chemical processes

Created by an Intelligent Designer

Information theory says codes require a designer, or else an undiscovered emergent process that generates codes

Speed

Gradual

Instantaneous events of intervention

In real time

Sources of Novelty

Random copying errors; natural selection is the hero

Insertion of information by outside agent

Transposition, Horizontal Transfer, Epigenetics, Hybridization, Symbiogenesis, Niche Construction, Retroviruses

Scientific Status

Randomness impossible to prove; much of the evidence is anecdotal, not empirical; millions of years too long to test

Supported by inference; not possible to experimentally demonstrate; rejects methodological naturalism

Demonstrated in 70-plus years of documented live lab experiments

Implications for Humanity

Chance, luck, and “blind pitiless indifference” of an uncaring universe; social Darwinism

Man is a special creation

Profoundly directional, cooperative process that invites us to humble ourselves and study with care

Implications for Science & Technology

Humans are smarter than nature, so we must now begin to direct our own evolution

Scientists can study designs, but not the design process

Nature is far wiser than we are, suggesting caution; cell research promises tremendous breakthroughs in medicine and engineering

Causality

Bottom-up

Top-down

Systems biology: There is no privileged point of causation

Implications for Spirituality

Religion is a myth, a way for “holy men” to wield power over the masses

Most commonly associated with evangelical Christianity

Science points to something beyond itself, far greater than us or the universe

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *