The Comparison Of Evolution And The Church With The Possible Existence Of God

The comparison of evolution and the Church with the possible existence of God

Introduction

Our work will consist in comparing what Dawkins says about evolution with what the Church says and see if there is the possibility that there is a god. For this, we first need to differentiate two very important concepts that will appear throughout work: evolution and evolutionism. These two concepts have in common that both propose that there is an offspring and a progressive complexity of species throughout human history (from Luca to Homo Sapiens-supiens, today).

It should be noted that evolutionism is in favor of the universe explaining for itself, that there is no creator. Therefore we could define it as a creative evolution. On the other hand, the evolution is compatible with a creator, so it would be an evolutionary creation. Darwin himself said that for there is evolution there must have been before the creation. Creation does not necessarily imply evolution, but evolution does imply prior creation. They are not two antithetical concepts, but complementary in a certain sense.

Developing

After having distinguished these two concepts we can enter into the subject. Richard Dawkins is a British scientist educated at Oxford University, a PhD in Ethology and Evolutionary Biology. He is a scientific dissemination writer who made himself known with the publication of his book "The Egoist Gen" in 1976, which we will rely on to do the job. He introduces himself as an open enemy of religion, in fact we have been able to hear some phrases of his such as: "I would love to see the death of the Catholic Church".

To understand Dawkins we need to know what Darwin said about evolution, since he is considered an orthodox Darwinist. He bases his theory of evolution on what Darwin said years before.In the book "The Origin of Species" published in 1859 Darwin surprises the world with its theory of evolution: species reproduce and compete for their survival. Those who manage to adapt or have a favorable quality to keep their species survive. Therefore only organisms are reproduced with that quality to survive. This is called, natural selection.

But Darwin did not explain what the engine of evolution moves, currently it has been discovered that the cause is genetic mutations. It is important to highlight that to explain the unanswered issues presented by the Dawkins universe, it distinguishes two types of agnosticism. Temporary agnosticism in practice (ATP) and permanent agnosticism in principle (app). Agnosticism is a philosophical attitude that declares inaccessible to human understanding all knowledge of the divine and what the experience transcends. 

Therefore, for Dawkins the first type would be an appropriate attitude towards unresolved scientific problems but that will be when sufficient data is available and the second corresponds to questions that can never be answered, regardless of the amount of evidence we have gathered,because the only idea of evidence is inapplicable in your case. Dawkins relates the question of God’s existence to temporary agnosticism, thus affirming that whether it exists and if not, it is a scientific issue that one day we will know the answer.

This is where Dawkins is not clear about the limits of science. According to the prestigious biologist Francisco Ayala, science is able to answer certain issues, but not others and that these are the subject of study of philosophy and theology. By definition, the existence of God is an issue that falls outside the field of study of science. Physical anthropology can explain the anatomical transformations between prehuman and protohuman hominids, but nothing more. That is why the question of design in nature is philosophical and theological and not scientific. 

We cannot ask science (as Dawkins does) to explain the existence of a god. An argument that Dawkins uses to deny the existence of God is that if the universe has been created by God. Who has created God? To refute this argument we can go back to the famous Aristotle philosopher that said: “There must be a reality that causes but is not caused. Because if there is an infinite regression of causes, then by definition the entire process could never begin ”.

When He asks who created God, he is already assuming that God was created but if not and then the question makes no sense. In reference to the position acquired by Dawkins from Atheo, Carl Sagan Discrepa saying the following words: “An atheist is someone who is sure that God does not exist, it is someone who has firm evidence against the existence of God. And I don’t know such clear evidence ". Therefore the existence of God cannot be denied. Pope Benedict XVI in the speech to the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences tells us that it is important to distinguish between a living being and a spiritual being.

The distinction between a simple living being and a spiritual being indicates the existence of the intellective soul of a free and transcendent subject. Therefore, the Magisterium of the Church has constantly affirmed that ‘each spiritual soul is directly created by God – it is not‘ produced ’by the parents – and is immortal’. The Vatican states that between science and faith there is a complementarity relationship. The scientific truth, which is in itself participation in the divine truth, can help philosophy and theology to understand more and more fully the human person and the revelation of God about man.

A revelation completed and perfected in Jesus Christ. This is a mutual enrichment between the search for the truth and the good of humanity (speech to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences.) The Church also tells us that a universe without beginning would not affect the notion that God is its cause. The fact of being created and loved immediately by God is the only thing that can ultimately justify the dignity of the human being. Indeed, man is not the result of simple chance or blind fatality, but rather is the fruit of a divine design. 

The human being has been created in the image and likeness of God, even more, is called to a communion relationship with God. Its destiny is eternal, and therefore it is not simply subject to the laws of this world that happens. The human being is the only creature that God has wanted for Himself, it is an end in itself, and cannot be treated as a means to achieve any other end, however noble that can be or seem. On the question of the origin of the human being, an evolutionary process could be admitted regarding his corporeality but, in the case of the soul, due to being spiritual, a direct creative action is required by God.

Since what is spiritual cannot be caused by something that is not spiritual. Between matter and spirit, there is discontinuity. The spirit cannot flow or emerge from matter, as a thinker has affirmed. Therefore, in man, there is discontinuity regarding other living beings. That is why the existence of God is necessary. Gerhard l.Müller, a prefect of the congregation for the doctrine of faith, in his letter "to the Christian God from modern atheism" explained how to understand modern atheism from the point of view of pontiffs as Benedict XVI and Pius XII taking into account the laws the lawsby Richard Dawkins. 

In this letter it makes it clear that neither the "memes" have been defined despite the numerous attempts, nor can it be affirmed that no sustainable study has verified them from the scientific-empirical point of view. We explain this data bearing in mind that the justification that the atheism of the de -Christianization process and its proposal of a lifestyle marked by profit and benefit is carried out, it is only done in scientific forms. Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith.

Benedict XVI, in his letter to atheist Piergiorgio Odifreddi, has affirmed that Richard Dawkins’ "mimetics" is only a proposal for "science fiction". In his works, Dawkins explains that in the same way that genes spread biological information by procreation, thus the "memes" spread cultural information by imitation. Ideas and opinions would mind mind as invisible "memes". Even more: Dawkins uses this theory as a criticism of religion, because according to him, religious beliefs are nothing but "virus" that attack the sick man.

Instead, dr. Michael Blume, a famous evolutionary biologist and theologian, has recently expressed himself in the sense that "Benedict XVI’s statement is fully correct": neither the "Memis" have been defined despite the numerous attempts made, nor can it be affirmed thatNo sustainable study has verified them from the scientific-empirical point of view. On the other hand, while all "mimetics" have abandoned this theory already in 2010, until present Richard Dawkins has not yet pronounced about the scientific failure of this proposal.

How to explain this data? Keep in mind that the justification carried out by the modern atheism of the de -Christianization process that the European and North American civilization has liveapparently scientific. Gerhard l.Müller, a prefect of the congregation for the doctrine of faith, in his letter "to the Christian God from modern atheism" explained how to understand modern atheism from the point of view of pontiffs as Benedict XVI and Pius XII taking into account the laws the lawsby Richard Dawkins. 

In this letter it makes it clear that neither the "memes" have been defined despite the numerous attempts, nor can it be affirmed that no sustainable study has verified them from the scientific-empirical point of view. We explain this data bearing in mind that the justification that the atheism of the de -Christianization process and its proposal of a lifestyle marked by profit and benefit is carried out, it is only done in scientific forms. Dawkins’ theory establishes that they are the genes – and not individuals – the agents on which evolution operates. 

Dawkins redefines the concept of gene as an inherited information unit that produces one or more specific effects, as long as there can be another information unit that produces different effects called allele. Selfishness constitutes a metaphor with which Dawkins explains that the probability that a prosper gene depends on its adaptation capacity to the environment. Organisms are, therefore, mere survival machines for genes. 

conclusion

In conclusion, organisms are the vehicles that ensure the continuity of the genes that give organisms the structure, model and instinct. A gene from an organism continues to exist if said being reproduces. An adequate metaphor for the theory of the selfish gene is an answer to the question «What was before, the chicken or the egg?". The answer, according to the theory of the selfish gene, would be that the chicken is nothing more than the medium in which the eggs reproduce. 

With these premises, Dawkins explains social relations: aggression, sex war, racism, generational conflict, and even the plausibility of altruism. Dawkins introduces the concept of meme as replicated non -biological such as ideas, the way of dressing, culture … Memes spread jumping from one brain to another through the imitation process. For the meme to succeed, it has to be memorable (in good or bad sense). The environments created by the genes ensure their survival and dissemination.