Evolutionism Vs Creationism

Evolution vs. Creation

Chris Pazianas

PHLA10

Both evolutionism and creationism are at opposite ends of the spectrum in terms of beliefs. Evolutionism is a gradual and mindless process in which species and organisms evolve into a more complex and adaptive form (Sober, p. 69). Creationism is the religious belief that a higher power designed everything that exists today through a supernatural intervention (Sober, p. 69). While at a superficial level, the battle between these two theories can be defined as science versus religion, however throughout this essay I will explain how evolution versus creation is not merely science against religion. I believe, this battle is more about how both ideologies limit themselves due to the stances they take, through this I will also provide criticisms about both evolution and creation. Lastly I will mention how theistic evolutionism relies on a balance of both science and religion to support and prove its theory.

At the fundamental core of evolution is Charles Darwin’s two part theory. The first part says that “all present day living things are genealogically related” (Sober, p. 71). This essentially means that a family tree has existed since the beginning of time, where we would even be able to find a common ancestor of both humans and chimps (Sober, p. 71). “The second part of Darwin’s theory is the idea of natural selection” (Sober, p. 71).  Natural selection is the process by which organisms better adapted to their environment will produce more offspring and evolve. In the textbook, Sober uses the example of zebras. Suppose all zebras run at a rate of 38mph, then a change in the genes also known as a mutation occurs. This allows the genetically altered zebras to now run at an advantageous speed of 42mph. However some zebras avoid the mutation and continue to run at 38mph, this is a disadvantage because they are now considered slower and more likely to get caught and eaten by other animals. Therefore the zebras that run at 42mph will less likely be caught, and will produce more offspring, after numerous generations all zebras will eventually run at a speed of 42mph (Sober, p. 73).

Evolution is considered a theory of science, however the root of the problem of this theory is that there is little room for scientific development. Scientific development is based on the scientific method, the scientific method involves hypothesizing, testing, observing and concluding. The scientific method also involves a testable and a possible negative answer to the hypothesis. According to Sober the hypothesis that evolutionists are examining cannot account for the patterns of reproduction and the evolution of complex adaptations (Sober, p. 73). If this discrepancy does not falsify the hypothesis then evolutionists have created a hypothesis that is not falsifiable. This moves the question from the realm of science to the type that should be answered by a philosopher or a theologian. In science things either happen or fail to happen (Sober, p. 85), it’s difficult to provide a scientific explanation for something that often happens or rarely happens. When people performing a scientific experiment have a pre conceived opinion on what the outcome will be bias factors into the equation and the scientific method is interfered with. Evolutionists already have the answer to their question, any evidence which suits their answer is accepted and evidence that their answer cannot explain is ignored.

Another criticism of evolutionism is the fact that there are uncertainties within evolutionary biology involving natural selection (Sober, p. 73). While natural selection is considered one of the foundations of evolution, there are still many questions that science fails to explain regarding natural selection, even current biologists have no answers to questions such as why some creatures reproduce sexually and others asexually, or how sexual reproduction evolved at all in the first place (Sober, p.  73). In the textbook, Sober refers to natural selection and states that biologists “are still somewhat puzzled about how it applies in particular cases” (Sober, p.  73). This relates to when I mentioned the hypothesis that evolutionists are examining which counteracts the design hypothesis, is not able to answer everything about reproduction and complex adaptations. Evolutionism limits itself by only using science to supports its theory, even then there are still open ended questions particularly about natural selection that Science may never be able to answer.

On the other hands creationists can explain any discrepancy to their theory by claiming that this was the way God operated in that moment (Sober, p. 84).  Clearly there is evidence that the world is older than 10,000 years old. Creationists can rationalize this evidence by saying this was the way God created the world, God made it appear to be billions of years old because he is God. This ideology allows no room for scientific evidence at all and uses religion and the bible as a focal point to support its theory.