Worldviews

Recently, I read one of the best argument about evolution that I had ever seen. And it is not from a scientific source - it comes from the layman, who is also well versed in philosophy of some sorts. I think the master stroke of the argument (apart from the argument itself) was leading it to conclusions that it can support, rather than extrapolating the argument. In other words, it rejected literal creationism, countered Parley's argument from design but not the possibility of God (or gods). It knocked out an intellectual foundation for God, but left it open to faith.

I thought that it might be challenge-able at some points (perhaps the origin of life which was left out of the discussion?), but it was probably not wise to do so since his knowledge of evolution itself was so much more in depth than mine was. Probably he knows things about it that he haven't mentioned.

Which bugged me for a while. Until I remembered a lesson that LT taught me quite a while ago.

It is never about the skirmished. Look beyond that and see the war itself.

It is a war of Worldviews.

Worldviews are basically the views that people have about the world. They are the assumptions inherent when people talk about things. For instance, there is the Hedonist worldview which believes that pleasure / happiness is the ultimate goal. So a hedonist would say things like "If it makes you happy.." There is also a Pragmatic worldview. The Pragmatist would say things like "If it works.."

Perhaps I should refine this a little. No one consistently have any of the worldviews. People are too fluxy (constant change-y) for that. Everyone however, exhibits them at various points in time. Most people have one or two favorite ones, and those are their most important worldviews.

So, what worldview does Evolution and Multiverse (Multiple Universe) support? It is that of Naturalism! Or at least, it is a step towards Naturalism.. It promotes the idea that there need not be a God. Notice that it is not full fledged Naturalism, which demands there to be no transcendent God, but it is a step towards it.

How then do we deal with a Naturalist worldview? Question Reason! It is by Reason that you come up with these conclusions, but why do you trust Reason? If Reason or Consciousness came about Randomly... Why then should it mean anything? Why can't it be merely perceived to mean something, rather than actually meaning something? (For a fuller discussion, see Lewis's Miracles)

Of course, it is logically possible to concede this and reject meaning as meaningless. That can't be debated, it is completely sound in itself, but.. it has the substance of explaining everything by leaving out everything important (see Chesterton's Orthodoxy).

Worldviews.. There aren't that many contentions if you look at them in terms of worldviews. Of course, sometimes, you do have to get down to answering the question itself, but quite often, you just have to question the conclusion which the contentions drive you to..

Hope this helps :)