Advertisement

Biology and Religion: The Case for Evolution

  • Francisco J. Ayala
Chapter
Part of the History, Philosophy and Theory of the Life Sciences book series (HPTL, volume 1)

Abstract

The theory of biological evolution is the central organizing principle of modern biology. In 1973, the eminent evolutionist Theodosius Dobzhansky famously asserted that “Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution.” Evolution provides a scientific explanation for why there are so many different kinds of organisms on Earth and gives an account of their similarities and differences (morphological, physiological, and genetic). Science has demonstrated again and again, beyond reasonable doubt, that living organisms evolve and diversify over time, and that their features have come about by natural selection, a process that accounts for their design. Yet, there are many people of faith in the United States and elsewhere who think that science, particularly the theory of evolution, is contrary to the teachings of the Bible and to religious beliefs, such as creation by God. Well before the formulation of the theory of evolution, religious authors over the centuries used the “argument-from-design” to demonstrate rationally, without reference to faith or divine revelation, the existence of God, as the author of the design of organisms. The argument from design has two parts. In one familiar form it asserts, first, that organisms evince to have been designed; second, that only God could account for the design. The argument from design was advanced, in a variety of forms, in Classical Greece and early Christianity. Its most extensive formulation is due to William Paley in his Natural Theology (Natural theology, or evidences of the existence and attributes of the deity collected from the appearances of nature. American Tract Society, New York, 1802). The eye—as well as all sorts of organs, organisms, and their interactions—manifests to be the outcome of design and not of chance, thus it shows to have been created by God. In the 1990s, the design argument was revived in the United States by several authors. The flagellum used by bacteria for swimming and the immune system of mammals, as well as some improbability calculations, were advanced as evidence of “intelligent design,” on the grounds that chance processes could not account for the phenomena to be explained. In The Origin of Species, Darwin (On the origin of species by means of natural selection. John Murray, London, 1859) advanced a scientific explanation of the design of organisms. The adaptations of organisms are outcomes not of chance, but of a process that, over time, causes the gradual accumulation of features beneficial to organisms, whenever these features increase the organisms’ chances of surviving and reproducing. There is design in the living world: eyes are designed for seeing, wings for flying, and kidneys for regulating the composition of the blood. The design of organisms comes about not by intelligent design, but by a natural process, which is creative through the interaction of chance and necessity. Organisms are pervaded by imperfections, dysfunctions, cruelties, and even sadism. The theory of evolution accounts for these mishaps by natural selection, as outcomes of natural processes, so that they need not be attributed to God’s explicit design. The theory of evolution perceived by some people of faith as contrary to religion, may thus be acknowledged as their “disguised friend.” The theory of evolution accounts for the design of organisms, but also for the dysfunctions, oddities, cruelty, and sadism that pervade the world of life, so that these deficiencies need not be attributed to specific agency by the Creator, which might implicitly amount to blasphemy. The foregoing considerations are important both for understanding and for accepting evolution as a fact of life, and should be taken into account by science educators and teachers.

Keywords

Natural Selection Scientific Explanation Intelligent Design Natural Theology Living World 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Aitken, G.M. 1998. Extinction. Biology and Philosophy 13: 393–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aquinas, T. 1905. Of God and his creatures. In Summa contra gentiles, ed. J. Rickaby, 241–368. London: Burns & Oates.Google Scholar
  3. Aquinas, T. 1964. Existence and nature of God. In Summa theologiae, ed. Blackfriars, 10–249. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  4. Arp, R. 1999. The quinque via of Thomas Hobbes. History of Philosophy Quarterly 16: 367–394.Google Scholar
  5. Augustine. 1998. The city of God, ed. R. Dyson. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Ayala, F.J. 2007. Darwin’s gift to science and religion. Washington, DC: Joseph Henry Press.Google Scholar
  7. Ayala, F.J. 2008. Darwin’s gift to science and religion: Commentaries and responses. Theology and Science 6: 179–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Babbage, C. 1838. The ninth Bridgewater treatise. A fragment. London: John Murray.Google Scholar
  9. Behe, M. 1996. Darwin’s black box: The biochemical challenge to evolution. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  10. Bell, C. 1833. The hand, its mechanisms and vital endowments as evincing design. Whitefish: Kessinger Publishing, LLC.Google Scholar
  11. Buckland, W. 1836. Geology and mineralogy. Considered with reference to natural theology. London: William Pickering.Google Scholar
  12. Burnet, T. 1691. Sacred theory of the earth. London: R. Norton.Google Scholar
  13. California Academy of Sciences. 2007. Suicide mating. California Academy of Sciences 5: 16–17.Google Scholar
  14. Chambers, R. 1844. Vestiges of the natural history of creation. London: John Churchill.Google Scholar
  15. Choiniere, J.N., X. Xu, J.M. Clark, C.A. Forster, Y. Guo, and F. Han. 2010. A basal Alvarezsauroid Theropod from the early Late Jurassic of Xinjiang, China. Science 327: 571–574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Daeschler, E.B., N.H. Shubin, and F.A. Jenkins Jr. 2006. A Devonian tetrapod-like fish and the evolution of the tetrapod body plan. Nature 440: 757–763.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Darwin, C. 1859. On the origin of species by means of natural selection. London: John Murray.Google Scholar
  18. Dembski, W. 1995. The design inference: Eliminating chance through small probabilities. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Dembski, W. 2002. No free lunch: Why specified complexity cannot be purchased without intelligence. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  20. Dobzhansky, Th. 1973. Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution. The American Biology Teacher 35: 125–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Haught, J.F. 1998. Darwin’s gift to theology. In Evolutionary and molecular biology: Scientific perspectives on divine action, ed. R.J. Russell, W.R. Stoeger, and F.J. Ayala, 393–418. Vatican City State/Berkeley: Vatican Observatory Press/Center for Theology and the Natural Sciences.Google Scholar
  22. Hooke, R. 1665. Micrographia, or, some physiological descriptions of minute bodies made my magnifying glasses with observations and inquiries thereupon. London: Martyn & Allestry.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hume, D. 1935. Dialogues concerning natural religion, ed. N. K. Smith, 244. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Johnson, P. 1993. Darwin on trial. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press.Google Scholar
  25. Johnson, P. 2002. The wedge of truth: Splitting the foundations of naturalism. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press.Google Scholar
  26. Judson, O. 2002. Dr. Tatiana’s sex advice to all creation. New York: Henry Holt.Google Scholar
  27. Klocker, H. 1968. God and the empiricists. New York: The Bruce Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  28. Lamarck, J.-B. 1809. Philosophie Zoologique. Paris: Duminil-Lesueur. English Trans. Elliot, H. 1914. The Zoological Philosophy. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  29. Meyer, S.C. 2009. Signature in the cell: DNA and the evidence for intelligent design. New York: Harper-Collins.Google Scholar
  30. Miller, H. 1857. The testimony of the rocks. Or, geology in its bearings on the two theologies, natural and revealed. Boston: Gould and Lincoln.Google Scholar
  31. Moore, A. 1891. Lux mundi, 12th ed. London: John Murray.Google Scholar
  32. More, H. 1662. An antidote against atheism. In A collection of several philosophical writings of Dr. Henry More, ed. F.I. MacKinnon, 1925. London: Flesher and Morden.Google Scholar
  33. Nieuwentijdt, B. 1718/2007. In The religious philosopher, or the right use of contemplating the works of the creator in the most amazing structure of the heavens with all their furniture. Trans. J. Chamberlayne. Whitefish: Kessinger Publishing, LLC.Google Scholar
  34. Paley, W. 1802. Natural theology, or evidences of the existence and attributes of the deity collected from the appearances of nature. New York: American Tract Society.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Peacocke, A.R. 1998. Biological evolution: A positive appraisal. In Evolutionary and molecular biology: Scientific perspectives on divine action, ed. R.J. Russell, W.R. Stoeger, and F.J. Ayala, 357. Vatican City State/Berkeley: Vatican Observatory Press/Center for Theology and the Natural Sciences.Google Scholar
  36. Plato. 1997. Timaeus. In Plato: Complete works, ed. J. Cooper. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  37. Ray, J. 1691. The wisdom of God manifested in the works of creation. London: Wernerian Club.Google Scholar
  38. Rönn, J., M. Katvala, and G. Arnqvist. 2007. Coevolution between harmful male genitalia and female resistance in seed beetles. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 104: 10921–10925.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Shubin, N.H., E.B. Daeschler, and F.A. Jenkins Jr. 2006. The pectoral fin of Tiktaalik roseae and the origin of the tetrapod limb. Nature 440: 764–771.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Stone, R. 2010. Bird-dinosaur link firmed up, and in brilliant Technicolor. Science 327: 508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Swinburne, R. 1994. The Christian God. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Voltaire. 1967. Voltaire, François-Marie Arouet de. In Encyclopedia of philosophy, vol. 8, 262–270. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  43. Ward, K. 2007. Divine action. Examining God’s role in an open and emergent universe, 44–45. West Conshohocken: Templeton Foundation Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Ecology and Evolutionary BiologyUniversity of CaliforniaIrvineUSA

Personalised recommendations