PhD Study Finds: Evolution is Incompatible with God!

Discussion in 'General Baptist Discussions' started by Revmitchell, Nov 5, 2014.

  1. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,332
    Likes Received:
    786
    The Graffin study: How evolutionists pretend that "religion" and evolution are compatible!

    by Richard Peachey

    Greg Graffin is well-known as the lead singer/songwriter for the punk rock band Bad Religion. Under Cornell historian of evolutionary biology Will Provine, Graffin earned a PhD in zoology. His research topic was "the intersection of evolutionary biology and theology and the various forms of compatibility." (Bold print in the quotations below indicates emphasis added.)

    (1) Graffin informally summarized his results in an e-mail to a Christian correspondent:

    "I have found that evolutionary biologists debase religion to a significant degree to make it compatible with science. They think they are doing religious people a service by subscribing to a form of compatibilism—that is, by maintaining that religion and evolutionary biology are compatible. In most evolutionary biologists' view, there is no conflict between evolution and religion on one important condition: that religion is essentially atheistic! I know it sounds crazy, but that is the result of my dissertation" (E-mail to Preston Jones. In Preston Jones [ed.], Is Belief in God Good, Bad or Irrelevant? A Professor and a Punk Rocker Discuss Science, Religion, Naturalism & Christianity. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2006, pp. 21f.)

    (2) On a more formal occasion Graffin and his advisor Provine offered this comment in a scientific article:

    "Evolutionary scientists are strongly motivated to ameliorate conflict between evolution and religion. Sociobiology offers them an apparent conciliatory path to the compatibility of religion and evolution, avoiding all language of inescapable conflict. Sociobiological evolution is the means to understand religion, whereas religion as a 'way of knowing' has nothing to teach us about evolution. This view allows a place for religion and sounds superficially comforting to compatibilists."

    The conclusion of that article refers to a questionnaire that was part of Graffin's PhD study:

    "Only 10 percent of the eminent evolutionary scientists who answered the poll saw an inevitable conflict between religion and evolution. The great majority see no conflict between religion and evolution, not because they occupy different, noncompeting magisteria, but because they see religion as a natural product of human evolution. Sociologists and cultural anthropologists, in contrast, tend toward the hypothesis that cultural change alone produced religions, minus evolutionary change in humans. The eminent evolutionists who participated in this poll reject the basic tenets of religion, such as gods, life after death, incorporeal spirits or the supernatural. Yet they still hold a compatible view of religion and evolution" (Greg Graffin and Will Provine, "American Scientist 95[4]:294-297, 2007.)

    http://www.creationbc.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=61&Itemid=74
     
  2. Deacon

    Deacon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2002
    Messages:
    6,971
    Likes Received:
    128
    There are quite a few technical terms used in the above statement.

    One term, nonoverlapping magisterial (NOMA) was made popular by Stephen Jay Gould in an explanation of compatibilism between religion and science. It might be worthwhile to read what he said to better understand the statement above.


    Nonoverlapping Magisteria [LINK] by Stephen Jay Gould

    Rob
     
  3. Deacon

    Deacon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2002
    Messages:
    6,971
    Likes Received:
    128
    The Creation Science Society of British Columbia should be ashamed to publish this.
    They've made "the Graffin Study" appear to be a scholarly research group.

    "Greg Graffin is well-known as the lead singer/songwriter for the punk rock band Bad Religion."

    Rob
     
  4. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,332
    Likes Received:
    786
    Another adhominem I see.
     
  5. go2church

    go2church
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2002
    Messages:
    4,304
    Likes Received:
    6
    Could be interesting. Things may be changing but I think the studies of sociology and cultural anthropology bend toward broader, more sweeping conclusions than most other "hard" sciences like physics, mathematics. So caution should be exercised when adopting what they have to say, especially in a dissertation.
     
  6. quantumfaith

    quantumfaith
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2010
    Messages:
    6,890
    Likes Received:
    0
    Those in the realm of science who are "incompatiblists" are usually those who reject any notion of a Creator to begin with. They most certainly reject the notions of Intelligent Design or Theistic Evolution.
     
  7. quantumfaith

    quantumfaith
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2010
    Messages:
    6,890
    Likes Received:
    0
    :)

    One dissertation does not a scientific principle establish.
     
  8. preachinjesus

    preachinjesus
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2004
    Messages:
    7,406
    Likes Received:
    99
    Its not even a dissertation, its just some ad hoc comments from a guy with a PhD who got an email from a "reporter." This is a nonsense article from a nonsense website.
     
  9. Crabtownboy

    Crabtownboy
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    16,634
    Likes Received:
    158
    There are thousands of dissertations out there and you can find at least one advocating just about anything you care to think of that supports your idea or belief.
     

Share This Page

Loading...