I'm continuing my discussion of The Challenge of Creation. Please read the posts Slifkin on ID and Slifkin&Klinghoffer first (though there is some repetition here).
R' Slifkin seems to side with the view that evolution was a series of apparently random events with incredibly fortuitous results, which he compares to the Purim story. Everything was natural though, therefor ID is wrong. I find this view problematic for many reasons.
If everything just happened on its own, how was it created by G-d? We don't know exactly what "ma'aseh B'raishis" was, but when the Torah says "and G-d created" could it really mean (like slifkin says) 'G-d built into the laws of nature the ability for life to exist"? Slifkin feels this is more elegant than any 'Divine Interference'. Since G-d could have created the world with one act, He must have. But the Mishna in Avos speaks of 10 creation utterances with which G-d created the world, and it deals with Slifkin's very issue (see post Ma'maros and Miracles). From a Jewish point of view, Slifkin seems wrong.
From a non-textual viewpoint, science has not removed the necessity of a Designer to explain the existence and perfection of life on Earth. ID proponents argue that nature shows design in a way that would be recognized in any other circumstance. No one can explain how the DNA of even the simplest life form could have in any way evolved or randomly formed. Slifkin admits this fact in his book. Its unclear why he feels science will eventually have a perfectly materialistic explanation of all of life's origins.
But even if Creation was 'like the Purim story', that wouldn't make ID wrong. If someone teaches the Purim story as pointing to a Guiding Hand, would Slifkin be against it? How else do all the unlikely events make sense? The same thing goes for the development of life on Earth. ID is necessary to explain how a series of fortuitous events could have occurred.
6 comments:
it seems like this is a one issue blog: everything is about the ten ma'amaros. if you are always going to talk about the ten ma'amaros at least you should know what it means. see the maharal at the beginning of Nesiv Hatorah or ask anonymous to post it
right now I'm focusing on ID and Slifkin's book. I will move on to other topics eventually. and however the maharal explains it, (u can post it if u want) he prob. also understood it as an act of divine interference.
Glunker, you really don't seem to understand what ID is, in terms of how the term is actually used by the ID movement. You also don't appear to have actually understood Slifkin's book.
Slifkin claims the ID movement is G-d of the gaps. I point out its not really an accurate description. ID proponents just point out that a designer is necessary to explain the existence and complexity of life.
I also point out Slifkin's argument against Divine intervention isn't very strong.
As I said, you don't seem to understand what the ID movement is about. Your statement that "ID is necessary to explain how a series of fortuitous events could have occurred" is incorrect. The ID movement goes much further than that.
read the quotes in the post "slifkin on ID".
when ID's point out life shows design or is irreducibly complex, they're trying to prove that randomness alone can't explain it. some may believe there was unnatural intervention too, but thats not the main point of the ID movement.
anyways, i point out that slifkin's attack on his understanding of ID is an attack on a basic Jewish belief of thousands of years.
Post a Comment