Diehard defenders of this massively complex metaphysical research program known as evolution are getting more and more weary and particular about the use of certain words or ideas which describe the theory. For example, we see an objection of a term used in a popular way to describe evolution…
“In spite of the nice contrast between ‘accident versus design’, the term design carries with it too many undesirable connotations, such as the existence of a creator, and should not be used in evolutionary theory. Design could be replaced with non-accidental or non-stochastic, but these substitute terms are awkward and not really informative.”–Evolutionary biologist Walter Bock of Columbia University
I’m not quite sure what Walter Bock believes to be “many undesirable connotations” with the use of the word “design.” I only see two connotations that evolutionists like himself would object to rather than many, and they are a supernatural creator namely God or intelligent agents.
“Darwin developed his theory of organic evolution in part as an explanation of the appearance and perfection of adaptations to counter the idea of design as advocated by Paley and accepted then by almost everyone in the western world, including biologists…”
I agree, design was the consensus of the majority of scientists during Paley’s time. And I certainly agree with the notion of Darwin wanting to “counter the idea of design” by proposing naturalism in the origin of species. But what professor Bock fails to recognize and struggles with are terms like “non-accidental” or “non-stochastic” both of which mean design.
He is basically looking for a term that can’t be connected with the meaning of design, but still imply the fundamental meaning of it. I hate to inform Professor Bock, but there is no such word and using some highly technical jargon doesn’t help either but it’s attempt only accomplishes confusion in the public realm so one can try to get the desired affect which is to conclude a certain way.
In the end, Professor Bock does in fact realize this and his proposal of not using the word “design” is the only option in his opinion, but not really the solution in which alludes him because he cannot come up with one word that would be suitable to what he feels is an overall problem with using a word that still implies design. Professor Bock believes very strongly the option of using other words might sway people to conclude naturalism rather than a creator or intelligent agents.
“Unfortunately in this respect there is no solution to the paradox posed by Darwin which should not have been expressed in the form he used; his query was expressed in a letter to a colleague and not in a manuscript intended for publication. Actually the living world as we see it is the result of chance because all of the attributes of these organisms evolved and the process of evolution is stochastic.”
I disagree evolution being totally “stochastic” even a militant atheist like Richard Dawkins admits nature looks designed, but in his opinion the observation is an illusion as stated below…
“The God Delusion: “Darwin and his successors have shown how living creatures, with their spectacular statistical improbability and appearance of design, have evolved by slow, gradual degrees from simple beginnings. We can now safely say that the illusion of design in living creatures is just that—an illusion.”
It is interesting to note, creationists and ID proponents also use the statistical improbability argument for their particular issue so it’s not just creationists and ID proponents using it as some would like us to believe. Overall, the claim of “spectacular statistical improbability” is nothing short of a miracle in fact, it’s a pretty enormous miracle.
There is a pattern in evolutionary theory, upwards trend, positive adaptation as it’s goal or progress rather than in a pattern of negative adaptation where animals wouldn’t be able to survive in the battle of the fittest in a particular environment. All these things are designed type features, but the question is, what or who designed them, God or an unthinking process using errors to somehow create new and better information, called; evolution? The answer is quite obvious, it’s God who created all animals for particular environments He also created (which we continue to study and learn about it’s very advance designs) with variation within it’s own kind. The massively complex metaphysical research program known as evolution was put in place to remove God, nothing else. The evidence for intelligent design is undeniable!