Reconciling Evolution & Faith

[mommas_boy]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' timestamp='1282625609' post='2162348']
The fiddler is breaking the link because it doesn't like R[s][/s]CC, replaces it with Catholic Church.

[url="http://tinyurl.com/2bg4e4j"]Try This[/url]
[/quote]

Perhaps I missed it, but I see nothing in this article that states a theological rationale as to why a Catholic may not believe in a theistic evolution.

On the topic of science, the most recent source in the footnotes is dated 1994 I believe. This article therefore cannot take into consideration many of the findings that have been made since genomic mapping (Human Genome Project was completed in 2000).

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='mommas_boy' timestamp='1282626446' post='2162350']
Perhaps I missed it, but I see nothing in this article that states a theological rationale as to why a Catholic may not believe in a theistic evolution.

On the topic of science, the most recent source in the footnotes is dated 1994 I believe. This article therefore cannot take into consideration many of the findings that have been made since genomic mapping (Human Genome Project was completed in 2000).
[/quote]
My post was just to fix the link that Knight posted and which was corrupted by the philters. I'm not really involved in this debate atm.

Peace.

[Laudate_Dominum]

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i1fGkFuHIu0[/media]

[Laudate_Dominum]

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-CvX_mD5weM&feature=channel[/media]

[Laudate_Dominum]

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K11knFKqW4s[/media]

[Laudate_Dominum]

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eblrphIwoJQ[/media]

[Mr.Cat]

Doctor Richard Dawkins; Atheist Scientist, ethologist, evolutionary biologist, professor, writer, former science chair of Oxford University, and Fellow of the Royal Society. Father George Coyne; Jesuit Priest, Catholic Scientist, theologian, philosopher, mathematician, astronomer, astrophysicist, former director of the Vatican Observatory, and head of the observatory’s research group which is based at the University of Arizona in Tucson.

The interview of Father George Coyne by Doctor Richard Dawkins comes to mind as an example of the reconciliation of faith with science, a Catholic and Atheist Scientist conversing politely, inside of a beautiful Catholic church celebrating the 200th anniversary of Charles Darwin's birth. Real Catholic Scientists like Father George Coyne are examples of how the Theory of Evolution is completely compatible with the Catholic faith.

This documentary interview is one segment of seven, its a lengthy watch but for those truly motivated its not so harsh.


[center][media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=po0ZMfkSNxc[/media][/center]

Edited August 24, 2010 by Mr.CatholicCat

[Hassan]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' timestamp='1282338970' post='2160757']
Where do you see violent chaos? I see an orderly progression of time and space as the world was prepared for Adam and Eve.
[/quote]


Then you are not talking about modern evolutionary biology, which is what Zigg was asking about.

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='Hassan' timestamp='1282665133' post='2162463']
Then you are not talking about modern evolutionary biology, which is what Zigg was asking about.
[/quote]
I think its the term violent I don't understand.

[Winchester]

[quote name='fidei defensor' timestamp='1282620634' post='2162326']
Not only does the Church come up with ways out, but these ways are conveniently non-falsifiable. Yes, they may make sense philosophically (if you accept certain premises,) but you can't disprove them either.
[/quote]
It's beyond science to prove or disprove a non-creature, so it makes sense "ways out" are "conveniently non-falsifiable."

One can't disprove Krishna, either.

The presence of a human intellect and the capability to perceive cause and effect would argue for an intelligible universe. It makes sense that evolution would occur and that man would be able to follow the progression of evolution. It makes sense that we would be able to trace back the universe to its beginnings and propose reasonable theories about how it came to be.

Further argument for an intelligble universe based upon percievable cause and effect is the requirement of faith. If there were no fossil records and man just suddenly appeared and it was verifiable that all this croutons occured 6000 years ago, whence faith? The only logical conclusion (without even the Bible) would be that somse superior being just magicked our butts here.

[KnightofChrist]

[url="http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5585125669588896670#"]Intelligent Design - Unlocking The Mysteries Of Life[/url]

[quote]A thoughtful and well presented argument for a turn away from the dry/rationalist argument that the miracle of life is a "nothing but" - scientifically explained foregone conclusion. Their is "intelligence" behind the design.[/quote]

I good video that shows that at least Natural Selection is not compatible with a Intelligent Designer. Why? One is purely natural and random, without an intelligent behind the force.

[mommas_boy]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' timestamp='1282634838' post='2162367']
My post was just to fix the link that Knight posted and which was corrupted by the philters. I'm not really involved in this debate atm.

Peace.
[/quote]

Peace indeed. My comment was directed toward Knight, not toward you. I just replied to your post. Sorry, my bad.

[Fidei Defensor]

[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1282670266' post='2162501']
It's beyond science to prove or disprove a non-creature, so it makes sense "ways out" are "conveniently non-falsifiable."

One can't disprove Krishna, either.

The presence of a human intellect and the capability to perceive cause and effect would argue for an intelligible universe. It makes sense that evolution would occur and that man would be able to follow the progression of evolution. It makes sense that we would be able to trace back the universe to its beginnings and propose reasonable theories about how it came to be.

Further argument for an intelligble universe based upon percievable cause and effect is the requirement of faith. If there were no fossil records and man just suddenly appeared and it was verifiable that all this croutons occured 6000 years ago, whence faith? The only logical conclusion (without even the Bible) would be that somse superior being just magicked our butts here.
[/quote]
Like I said, makes sense philosophically but not scientifically, hence I cannot accept it.

[Winchester]

[quote name='fidei defensor' timestamp='1282687709' post='2162616']
Like I said, makes sense philosophically but not scientifically, hence I cannot accept it.
[/quote]
I said it better.

[mommas_boy]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1282678888' post='2162556']
[url="http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5585125669588896670#"]Intelligent Design - Unlocking The Mysteries Of Life[/url]



I good video that shows that at least Natural Selection is not compatible with a Intelligent Designer. Why? One is purely natural and random, without an intelligent behind the force.
[/quote]

I'm not convinced that natural selection precludes intelligence.

A real-world example: computer programmers in AI research are starting to model systems of natural selection in order to engineer optimal solutions to computer problems. The goal is not to simulate natural evolution in the biologic sense (that is, to solve biological problems), but rather to use the paradigms of "natural selection" to solve computer problems. Here, there is an intelligence (ie. the programmer) that creates an environment where solutions to problems are able to "reproduce", mutate, and compete, usually on the basis of performance. The result is an optimal solution that the programmer is then able to use in production, and one that is better than any the programmer could have created on their own. Thus, the best engineering decision that the programmer could have made was the decision to use a system modeled on natural selection.

Another example is a famous lab used to teach evolution, called [url="http://www.accessexcellence.org/AE/AEC/AEF/1995/westerling_selection.php"]Evolutionstechnik: Selection and Variation
in the Egyptian Origami Bird[/url]. Here students create paper airplanes that randomly mutate. Airplanes that perform better are selected for further reproduction and mutation. The end result is an optimal design. Students then apply different selection criteria, achieving different solutions to the new problems: solving for curved flight, straight flight, and short flight.

Here, the intelligence (the student in the lab exercise) crafts different selection criteria, yielding a different engineering solution. Could God not have used a system of natural evolution, then crafted different natural selection criteria -- intelligently -- in order to produce different optimal evolution solutions?