"Natural Theology " by William Paley , scientific and philosophical controversy over the "design argument"
Outstanding English theologian William Paley (1742-1805), Senior Archdeacon of Carlisle , in his book "Natural Theology , or evidence of the existence of God and His attributes , collected from the phenomena of nature" [1 ] puts forward an interesting argument for the existence of God. From ancient times, this argument is known as a physical- theological proof of God's existence. Kant in the " Critique of Pure Reason" , criticizing the physico- theological proof as evidence of the existence of God, " which borrows from a variety of intelligence , beauty , order, and appropriateness of the world" , yet says: "This is proof always deserves to to it treated with the greatest care "[2 ] .
In presenting this argument Paley raised to the top of the first chapter and the entire book is devoted to his gradual disclosure . Paley writes: "If you have stumbled on a stone and you will be told that the stone was lying there a long time ago , with the dawn of time , you will not be surprised, and easily believe what was said . But if there's a rock you will see the clock , you would not believe if you are told that they have always been here . Their sophisticated device , reasonable practicability , the consistency of the various parts give you some idea of what the clock is the creator ... [3] ... contrivances of nature surpass tricks (human) art, in the complexity and subtlety of perception, the complexity of the mechanism ... they are more perfect than all the works of human ingenuity ... "[4] . This argument in favor of the existence of God subjected to disparaging criticism in a book by Professor , University of Oxford (1995 and 2008 ). Richard Dawkins ( rod.1941 g ) . Its very name , "The Blind Watchmaker " tunes on the controversy with Paley's argument . In his book, Dawkins shows that as the " creator " of complex organisms observed people playing blind evolutionary process that it is possible to simulate on a computer , for example, on the program " Biomorph ." Launched in 1986 , the book became a best seller , has received two prestigious literary awards , sold millions of copies worldwide. What attracts readers counterargument atheist Professor Richard Dawkins , directed not only against Paley's argument , but against the Christian theology of creation in general? It is extremely simple . The principle of self-development of life forms , from the simplest to the most complicated method of natural selection leads to the highest complexity of the original simplicity . It is this complexity and should be admired . And if for this complexity is Watchmaker , it is the blind watchmaker. This is just a faceless law of nature , brilliantly open and informed by Charles Darwin in his book " The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection" in 1859 , which in its own way to understand the arguments Paley [ 5]. Developing the criticism of traditional proofs of God's existence , and based on modern scientific material , Dawkins creates the following masterpiece of atheist apologetics, which is called " The God Delusion " ( 2007 ) . It has been translated into 31 languages of the world, and its circulation - more than 2 million copies. In this book , like many others , Dawkins puts methodical questioning the whole Christian theology , including its unfounded , unscientific , hindering progress.
Is Richard Dawkins right ? Convincing if his criticism of the " design argument ", as it is now called the Paley's argument ? A contemporary of Dawkins , his colleague at the University of Oxford , Alister McGrath (born 1942 ), received degrees in biology and theology , based on the same scientific material that Dawkins comes to the opposite conclusion . In the book "God Dawkins : Genes , Memes and the Meaning of Life " [6 ], he writes that the modern biochemistry , genetics , the idea of evolution, can be used as an argument not only atheists, but theists , but even agnostics . Everything depends on the worldview researchers [ 7]. For example , more faithful Christian scholars are inclined toward theistic evolution , including Darwin's contemporaries , which consisted in correspondence with him Presbyterian Asa Gray and Charles Kingsley, an Anglican priest , a Catholic priest Pierre Teilhard de Chardin (1881-1955) and Hans K;ng ( rod.1928 g). What's more - after the encyclical of Pope Pius XII in 1950 «Humani Generis» evolution is the dominant doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church. Ronald Fisher (1890-1962) and Theodosius Dobzhansky (1900-1975) - and the Christians , and , at the same time , the developers of the synthetic theory of evolution. Dobzhansky , a child of Russian Orthodox Church in 1973, wrote a famous essay in support of evolutionary creationism , titling it " Nothing in biology does not matter except in the light of evolution ", which states: " ... the number of living species has not diminished , in fact , it is, probably increased with time. All this is understandable only in the light of the theory of evolution ( and without it all) it seems pointless to act the part of God , who made innumerable species of nothing, and then let most of them die out ! ... I am a creationist and evolutionist . Evolution - from God, it is the method of creation of nature. Creation is not an event that happened in 4004 BC, a process that began about 10 billion years ago and is still going on " . [8]
The dispute Dawkins and McGrath - it is a conflict of interpretations. His prototypes we see in ancient times. Since Democritus believed that there was a world of atoms by their random coupling. But the Stoics , sharing his idea of its atomic origin of the world , recognize the idea of God who arranges these atoms . Socrates argued with the Sophists , who denied the existence of one God and the world of ideas. So one Stoic Socrates said : "I see a horse and a lion, and the idea horseness lvinosti not see ." To which Socrates replied, " To this we must look with new eyes ." It is the eyes of faith, who for the procedure ( design ) in the world perceive the Lawgiver - the Creator of the universe. The same order Dawkins pushes for recognition of the metaphysical principle of nature that can not be proved by means of tools of modern biology , and he believes in this principle as a blind watchmaker . He does not look " different eyes ", but this is his position , for which he will answer to God , from whom turned away so many of the faithful. Let's leave it to the posthumous fate of God's judgment . Let us remember that Charles Darwin , who is so fond refer Dawkins as a destroyer of Paley's argument , it took the book "Natural Theology " with them to create a life-changing for the theory of evolution around the world on board the " Biggl " (1831-1836 gg.) . Darwin theologian by training, has not been able to decide to publish their views, probably also because of his grandfather Erasmus Darwin , a professional biologist , a lot of times I tried to express the idea of evolution , but every time his arguments broke on the criticism of Paley , who called his opponent's efforts to prove spontaneous emergence of life " darvinizatsiey ." About Charles Darwin is known that he never presented himself an atheist , and his evolutionary theory - an instrument of atheism. In his autobiography he wrote: " Another source of conviction in the existence of God , the source is not associated with the senses , and with reason, impresses me much more weighty . It is very difficult or even impossible to imagine this immense and wonderful universe , including man here and his ability to look far into the past and the future, as the result of blind chance or necessity. Thinking this way , I feel compelled to address the root causes , which has intelligence, to some extent, the same human mind , that is deserving of the title theist (As far as I am able to remember , this conclusion strongly possessed me about a time when I wrote "The Origin of Species" , but from that time its meaning for me the beginning , very slowly, and not without much hesitation , more and more weakened. ) . Mystery ... the beginning of all things is insoluble to us, and as for me , I must be content with the fact that to remain agnostic "[ 9]. In his book " The Origin of Species" Darwin we see parallels with the unavoidable "Natural Theology " by William Paley . Only the highest order for one of them - a direct proof of intelligent design , for the second - a consequence of a long evolution taking place not without God. Darwin wrote: " It is hard to resist comparing the eye to a telescope . We know that this tool has been enhanced long efforts of the highest human minds where we naturally conclude that the eye was formed by the same process. But would it not be too hasty a judgment ? Do we have the right to assign the intellectual forces of the Creator , human-like ? ... We have to assume that each new form tool multiplies in millions of copies, and only lasts as long as there will not be made better , followed by all the old are destroyed. In living bodies, variation will cause minor changes , their offspring will multiply almost indefinitely , and natural selection will select with unerring skill each improvement. We assume that this process continues for millions of years for each year on millions of individuals of all kinds , can not we assume that in this way will form a living optical instrument , such as a superior tool of glass , as far exceed the works of the Creator's works of man ? [ 10 ] ... There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers the Creator originally breathed into a few forms or , and while the planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning has developed and continues to develop an infinite number of the most beautiful and most wonderful forms, " [ 11].
But compare this statement with the same judgment Paley dedicated to the glorification of the eye as a divine instrument : "I know of no better way to introduce such a large object ( like " design argument " , that is the argument of creation - DN ) than the comparison ... eye, for example , with a telescope . .. The eye was made for vision , as is, and the telescope was made to assist him . They are made on the same principle , both created in conformity with the laws on which the transfer occurs and the refraction of light rays . I'm not talking about the origin of the laws themselves , but these laws are fixed in their construction , and in both cases , adapted to them "[ 12].
Thus, the conclusion is obvious . " Buried " William Paley's argument to criticism R. Dawkins ? With determination - no.
Notes:
1.Paley, W. 1809 . Natural Theology: or, Evidences of the Existence and Attributes of the Deity. 12th edition London: Printed for J. Faulder.
2.Kant Emmanuel . Works in 6 volumes . V.3 . M. , Thought, 1964/ P. 539
3.Paley, W. P.1
4.Tam same , P.18
5 . Works of Charles Darwin , v.3 . Moscow: Publishing House of the USSR Academy of Sciences in 1939 . From 101: "Never will the body be formed , as noted by Paley (Paley), with the express purpose of causing pain or any harm to its owner. If you sum up the good and the evil , cause every part of the organization , on the whole , each part of this will be useful . " But this is not the cause of God , and natural selection , Darwin believed - MD
6. Alister McGrath. Dawkins' God: Genes, Memes, and the Meaning of Life. Oxford, England: Blackwell Publishing, 2004 .
7. Alister McGrath. Has Science eliminated God? -Richard Dawkins and the Meaning of Life. Science & Christian Belief, Vol 17 , No. 2 . P. 115
8. Dobzhansky, Th. 1973 . «Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution» The American Biology Teacher 35 : (March): 125-129.
9. The Autobiography of Charles Darwin: 1809-1882 Paperback - September 17 , 1993 by Charles Darwin (Author), Nora Barlow (Editor). Russ . Option : Memories of the development of my mind and character . A fragment of the V. Charles Darwin . Works . Per. English Sobolev ed. Acad. VI Sukacheva . Publishing House of the USSR Academy of Sciences . T. 9. Moscow, 1959 .
10 . Darwin, C. op. cit . , P.93
11. Ibid . S. 270
12. Paley, W. P.18