Philosophers comprise a group in which I feel I belong. Having said that, It should be noted that I think that not all philosophers were terribly wise. In fact, I must conclude that a great many were willfully, and quite deliberately, self-deluded. One can only conclude that they are, after all, merely human.
For example:
"Let's say you're walking around and you find a watch on the ground. As you examine it, you marvel at the intricately complex interweaving of its parts, a means to an end. Surely you wouldn't think this marvel would have come about by itself. The watch must have a maker. Just as the watch has such complex means to an end, so does nature to a much greater extent. Just look at the complexity of the human eye. Thus we must conclude that nature has a maker too."
So declared William Paley in one of the most famous procreationist arguments in all of human history. These words are used again and again today, indeed, ad nauseam,as an acid test, an undeniable proof that abiogenesis and evolution could not possibly be correct, that science itself must be merely a religion -- and a foolish one at that.
But it should be noted that Mr. Paley missed a few points. This is what he should have said:
"If you're walking along and see a watch, you know it must have had a creator. Looking how complicated it is! See how it has exactingly machined parts...it had to be carefully manufactured. This is especially confirmed when you see the watch having sex with a female watch. Then, when she has a litter of little baby watches, you see how they are preyed upon by…Grandfather clocks? Only a few of them survive…Oh, that's right. Living things are very, very different from watches."
How odd that Mr. Paley never noticed these details.
William Paley was an idiot.
After thoughts on creationism.
I know I can be quite sharp, even acerbic, in my criticisms of creationists, but it should be noted that what I am primarily opposing is the hypocrisy, intellectual deceit, and spiritual failures of so many in that community.
Again and again one is presented with an endless series of individuals who first proclaim that the one and only test of truth is the Bible. Then they proceed to torture, chop up, and superglue together a hideous Frankenstein Monster of “evidence” and “facts” to support their positions. The resulting creation is so pitiful that it cannot even be brought to life. It can only lie there and rot.
I've listed three points that I find particularly offensive; hypocrisy, intellectual deceit, and spiritual failure. I will take a look at each one of these individually.
Hypocrisy.
We are presented time and again with a declaration that the only the test of truth which is acceptable is absolute faith in the Bible. Blind, unquestioning faith in the Bible. Then the individual attempts to create a whole network of physical evidence to support their supposedly faith based position.
Epistemology is a philosophic term which relates to the nature of human knowledge. That is to say, what can we humans know, and how can we know it? If your epistemology is faith, then it is faith which is relevant to any discussion. The facts are irrelevant. Either your faith is complete and sufficient or it isn’t. This both begins and ends any and all discussions. You have declared that the truth has been revealed to you by a higher authority, that you accept that, and that is all there is to say.
To add a series of complicated and deeply flawed arguments regarding objective reality to this argument is to say that you lied, and were in fact being profoundly hypocritical, when you said that faith was all that mattered.
Intellectual deceit.
The supposed facts and evidences which are presented are ludicrous, when they are or are not outright lies and deliberate falsehoods. Endless ridiculous exaggerations and other distortions of what scientists and students of science actually believe constitute a mainstay of creationist apologists. One particular extreme individual reported on his website that Darwin thought that men and women lived side-by-side as separate species for millions of years before they finally evolved sex. He declared “Darwinists” thought that men and women prior to that reproduced by fission. When this error was pointed out to him in no uncertain terms by a critic, he pulled that statement off his website and then posted another one declaring “Darwinists” believe that elephant males and females had lived for millions of years… Etc. etc.
Maliciously and deliberately misstating your opponents’ positions in order to make your opponent sound ridiculous is intellectual dishonesty in its most blatant form. There are many more examples of deliberate lies and deceit spread by these individuals, but I don’t care to go into them in great length at this point. If you are interested go to YouTube, type in creationists and debunkers, and you will find an amazing list which is stunning in its breadth.
Spiritual failure.
This may sound identical to the first point, but it differs in that hypocrisy is to be found in your relationship to others (“I say this, but do that.“) while spiritual failure is deeply personal. The individual claims that faith is all that matters to him, yet feels he must desperately thrash about to create some mishmash supposedly empirical evidence to shore up his shaky position. He does this because he knows his own position is not believable—not even to himself. Having loudly declared himself to be a man of faith, he then demonstrates that he has no real faith at all.
I will never agree with creationism. I think it’s silly superstition. I think it’s a serious misinterpretation of the meaning and purpose of the Bible and religion in general. Nevertheless, I will respect the moral, intellectual, and spiritual honesty of an individual that says faith is what I have, faith is all I need, that is the end of the discussion.
As I have been watching creationists on YouTube I did see one for whom I have this respect. He said flatly that he knows all the evidence shows that he is wrong. He then went on to say that he believed in creationism because the Bible said so and his test of truth was faith in the Bible.
I think he is terribly wrong and very misguided, but I am compelled respect his honesty.
