Hey All,
So, I'm working on an argument for why Evolution and Christianity cannot meld from an ethical perspective. Emphasis on WORKING. This post is the first of probably a lot to reach a complete argument, but I decided to throw my thoughts out there, and start getting feedback. After all, that's how philosophical arguments get refined. So, here we go:
A man goes out and buys gears, pulleys, a battery, a smoth flat disc, some black paint, a chain, some sheet metal, and two thin strips of iron, one slightly longer than the other, but both short. He begins constructing what he hopes will accurately keep measure of the passage of the day and marcate the different sections of a day by numerical distinction. After weeks of effort, he creates his prototype pocketwatch. He puts the battery in, and it doesn't work as he wanted it to. His first thought is to try another battery. When that doesn't work, he begins refining the gears and pulleys to try and fix the problem, until eventually the watch works. He will now expect the watch to perform its function as long as he supplies battery power. If it doesn't, he will consider it broken and will either fix it or discard it, whichever he chooses.
Here's my argument based on the above thought experiment:
P1: The Watchmaker has invested everything needed to create the pocketwatch
P2: The Watchmaker has a specific purpose and function in mind as he creates this watch
P3: Once it is successfully created, he continues to provide everything the watch needs to function properly
C: The Watchmaker has the right to expect the watch to function properly without exception
I would like to call this conclusion the Creator's Prerogative, the sole right of any inventor, maker, or creator to put expectations, purposes, and even requirements into the existences of their creations. Generalized, the principle looks more like this:
P1: The Creator has invested everything needed to make their creation
P2: The Creator has a specific purpose and function intended for their creation
P3: The Creator continually provides everything needed for the creation to function according to the Creator's intentions
C: Therefore, the Creator has Creator's Prerogative, the right to expect and require the creation to function according to the purposes and intentions of the Creator, and even to create consequences in the event of failure to do so.
Ok, that's what I have so far. Major roadblock already: this argument works flawlessly for any inanimate or animate thing loacking a will of its own. That means it doesn't work for things with a will of their own, such as humans, so I'm still working on that.
Barring that roadblock, what issues do you have with this argument? Where is it weak? What do you like about it so far?
3 comments:
so what you are saying is that this watch didnt work at first, so adaptations were made until it did? so originally assembled it did not fit the purpose it was intended to fit, so modifications were made. do not the concepts of evolution and anagenesis, species modificatin, apply here? gradual change=evolution. if this can apply to a watch, it can also apply to other beings. all aspects of evolution must be understood however before rejecting it.
I have not even brought the evvolution vs. creation debate into play here yet. The ultimate goal is to show an ethical problem related to evolution, but I'm not there yet.
Also, I have studied evolution extensively, and am not simply disagreeing with it.
Please refrain from stating your stance on the evolution vs. creation debate unless it pertains directly to the premises and argument I've laid out. Right now, the argument pertains to the general category of creators/makers/inventors and the possibility of their prerogative. Eentualyy this thought process will lead to a discussion of that debate, but like I said, I'm not there yet.
I may not be a biology major, but I have studied this debate and the opposing sides extensively, so please don't sue ignorance on me just yet.
I don't think you have a roadblock at all. If human beings have a will of their own, it is by the Creator's will, not in spite of it.
Consider a common case in works of fantasy and science fiction, in which a sorcerer or scientist sets out to create some golem or machine that will awaken with the ability to see, learn and act on what it learns. It is the Creator's hope (I think) that its creation will use these capacities to forge its own way, though hopefully one of decency. And of course the Creator always takes immense delight in the coming to life of its creation and the autonomy it exercises afterward. Shortly after this, it is not uncommon for the creature to rebel against its creator and perform a number of terrible deeds before the story's end, but that does not mean the Creator's Prerogative, as you call it, was broken. On the contrary, it was carried out with wild success. Very wild.
Post a Comment