Darwinism: Science or Naturalistic Philosophy?
Phillip Johnson - William Provine
Debate at Stanford University
April 30, 1994
Video Study Guide
Condensed format
PDF format (51613
bytes)
Published by: Access Research Network;
P. O. Box 38069; Colorado Springs, Colorado 80937-8069
Phone: 719-633-1772; e-mail: arn@arn.org;
Internet: http://www.arn.org
Copyright 1996
This guide (condensed format) is included as a printed companion
with the Johnson-Provine Stanford Debate Video Study Kit (Item#
V004sk) available from ARN. The full version of this guide (Item#
B021) is available and may be ordered from Access Research Network on
this website.
Contents:
Introduction To The
Video Study Guide
The videotape may be played continuously from Johnson's Opening
Statement through the Question and Answer period or, preferably,
it may be divided into modules for more effective interactive
discussion. Instructors wishing to lead in depth discussion of
the material should stop the tape at the end of each section.
The counter readings start from the first video image.
Opening and Introductory
Remarks
Tape Counter (00:00:00 - 00:01:32)
Phillip E. Johnson:
Opening Statement
Tape Counter (00:01:43 - 00:21:42)
return to top of page
Section l: Philosophical
Naturalism/ Theistic Realism
Tape Counter (00:01:43-00:07:17)
Main Points
- Neo-Darwinian theory of evolution as an unplanned, undirected
process is inconsistent with any meaningful theism.
- The Neo-Darwinian conclusion about the process of evolution
is based on a premise of metaphysical naturalism: that there
are no causes except matter in mindless motion. Is this premise
true?
Questions for Discussion
- On what major points do Johnson and Provine agree?
- What assumption behind mainsteam evolutionary biology does
Johnson identify and criticize?
return to top of page
Section 2: Life Through
Time Exhibit: Evidence/Inference
Tape Counter (00:07:20-00:15:22)
Main Points
- The Hard Facts Wall" exhibit does not make the critical
distinction between empirical evidence and theoretical inferences
and speculations.
- The theory that all life is connected by a branching tree-like
pattern (the "cone of increasing diversity") is not
supported by the fossil evidence. All the major groups appear
suddenly in the Cambrian explosion and no new phyla have appeared
in the last 500 million years.
Questions for Discussion
- What criticism does Johnson offer of the exhibit titled "The
Hard Facts Wall"? What lesson does he draw?
- How does Johnson explain the uncritical thinking of the evolutionary
biologists about their theoretical explanation? How does he relate
this to their premise of metaphysical naturalism?
return to top of page
Section 3: Artificial
Selection and Natural Selection
Tape Counter (00:15:26-00:19:37)
Main Points
- Artifical Selection (Selective Breeding) is an imperfect
analogy to Natural Selection. Selective Breeding is purposeful,
directed and intelligent. Natural Selection is without purpose,
undirected and without intelligence.
Questions for Discussion (See Argumentation:
Faulty Analogy)
- How is Selective Breeding different from Natural Selection,
using examples of how breeders work and how natural selection
operates?
- Why did the variations among light and dark colored "peppered
moths" become such an important example of natural selection?
Does natural selection account for the arrival of the fittest
or the survival of the fittest?
return to top of page
Section 4: Neo-Darwinism
as Philosophical Naturalism
Tape Counter (00:19:49-00:22:42)
Main Point
- The naturalistic world-view has not actually been demonstrated
by the empirical evidence. It has been assumed from the beginning,
as a premise, biasing the final interpretation of the evidence.
There is no compelling reason to believe naturalism. It is not
based on the empirical evidence. It has presumed its conclusion
in its premise.
Question for Discussion
- According to Johnson, why shouldn't microevolutionary mechanisms
be extrapolated to account for the arrival of major innovations
in the history of life?
return to top of page
William Provine: Opening
Statement
Tape Counter (00:24:32-00:25:42)
return to top of page
Section l: Phil's Views
Tape Counter (00:26:02-00:26:42)
Main Point
- Johnson is described as a Christian who believes that God
created life, that God provides a basis for ethics, for free
will and responsibility, and for ultimate meaning in life.
Question for Discussion
- What type of argument does Provine use in presenting Johnson's
personal views? (see Appendix l)
return to top of page
Section 2: Darwin,
Common Descent and Natural Selection
Tape Counter (00:27:02-00:31:32)
Main Point
- Darwin first developed the theory of common descent,
and later the hypothesis of Natural Selection as an alternative
to the concept of Intelligent Design.
Questions for Discussion
- What are the evidences cited in support of the theory of
common descent?
- How does the theory of common descent differ from the proposition
that Darwinian mechanismsnon-intelligent, undirected processescreated
human beings?
- Does the acceptance of Natural Selection necessarily undermine
the concept of the intellgent design of living things? Explain.
return to top of page
Section 3: Modern Evidence
for Darwinian Evolution
Tape Counter (00:31:40-00:41:12)
Main Points
- The modern evidence for selective breeding does not indicate
any limits. Based upon present knowledge, it is certain that
dogs can be bred the size of rats or buffalo that will constitute
new species.
- Flying squirrels demonstrate a functional transitional
point between tree squirrels and true flight. They have not lost
the use of limbs for climbing.
- A Creator cannot be an omniscient designer with all of its
creations destined for extinction.
Questions for Discussion
- What evidence does Provine provide to support the claim that
selective breeding can ultimately result in major evolutionary
change?
- Is Provine's argument for the development of wings in functional
stages demonstrated by the example of the flying (gliding)
squirrels?
- What is the relevance of extinctions to the question of origins?
return to top of page
Section 4: Atheistic
Humanism/Christian Humanism
Tape Counter (00:41:18-00:44:22)
Main Point
- The philosophical conclusions of Darwinism have been strongly
supported by modern evolutionary biology: no gods, no purposes
in nature, no life after death, no ultimate foundations for ethics,
no ultimate meaning for life, no free will for humans.
Questions for Discussion
- Do these conclusions follow from the evidences presented,
or are they implicit in the premises of metaphysical naturalism?
- According to Provine, what are the positive benefits of atheistic
humanism?
return to top of page
Phillip Johnson: Rebuttal
Tape Counter (00:45:02-00:58:27)
Major Point
- Patterns of extinction are among the important ways the fossil
record has been contradicting the predictions of Darwinism.
Question for Discussion
- In what ways do the catastrophic mass extinctions contradict
the expectations of Darwinian theory?
Major Point
- The hypothetical accumulation of small changes becoming big
changes is the wrong way of looking at the problem. The important
issue is the irreducible complexity of organisms: genetic information
encoding complex interrelated mechanisms that all have to exist
and operate together in an extremely complicated way.
Questions for Discussion
- How does the interrelated complexity of organisms, from the
molecular to the organism level, present a challenge to the step-by-step
process of change through variation and natural selection?
- How could natural selection inhibit the origin of complex
systems of integrated components on a step-by-step basis?
Major Point
- The predicted patterns of step-by-step progression from one
thing to another, especially among the phyla of the Hard Facts
Wall, are totally absent. The proof that complexity-building
mutations arrived regularly to build new complex organs isn't
in the fossil record. Change doesn't seem to occur that way.
Question for Discussion
- Does the absence of the predicted numerous transitional forms
constitute a significant challenge to the Neo-Darwinian model
of step-by-step change?
return to top of page
William Provine: Rebuttal
Tape Counter (00:58:57 - 0l:0l:12)
Major Point
- "The question of evolution by descent is separate
from the question of mechanisms of evolution. There is
strong evidence for evolution by descent. The disagreements
in evolutionary biology concern the mechanisms of evolution.
We can look at the evidence and make the very reasonable conclusion
that the entire process was through evolution by descent."
Question for Discussion
- What becomes of the strong conclusions from evolutionary
biology if we "leave aside whether the process is purposeless
or guided by God?"
Major Point
- Many museum exhibits are poorly designed. Shall we conclude
that because the museum exhibits are poor, evolution has not
occurred?
Questions for Discussion
- Was this Johnson's point about the museum exhibit? If the
museum exhibit were improved, would life through time resemble
a tree or a forest?
- What is the difference between empirical evidence and theoretical
inferences?
Major Point
- The point is that artificial selection (Selective Breeding)
is effective, not that it's purposeless. Natural Selection is
sure to be more powerful than artificial selection, because it
can see more of the organism than artificial selection
ever could.
Questions for Discussion
- Have the results of studies on natural selection, such as
variations in the coloring of peppered moths and variations
in the kinds of beaks of galapagos finches, demonstrated that
natural selection can "see" more of the organism than
selective breeders can?
- Has persuasive evidence been presented that purposeless,
unintelligent natural selection can achieve the results that
have been attained by intelligent, purposeful selective breeding?
return to top of page
Question And Answer
Period
Tape Counter (01:02:22 - 01:45:42)
Questioner 6 (01:15:20) To Johnson
Main Point How can anyone
favor teaching creationism in schools? Creationism has no methodology
for correcting itself in the face of evidence.
Johnson's Reply "I
don't argue that creationism should be taught. We should teach
science honestly presenting not only the confirming evidence but
also the disconfirming evidence. Students should understand the
counter-arguments to the claim that artificial selection demonstrates
the ability of undirected and purposeless process to create entirely
new kinds of organisms."
Provine's Reply "Let
me say one word, too. I really genuinely agree with Phil on this
issue. We need to have more discussion in the university communities.
I start my course on evolution with the students reading Phil's
book. Then he comes and visits. He does more to turn my students
into evolutionists than anything else. So I like open debate!"
Question for Discussion
- What would be the advantages and disadvantages of education
that required students to learn both sides of major issues, the
confirming as well as the disconfirming evidence?
return to top of page
General Readings
- Johnson: Phillip Johnson, Darwin on Trial; Reason in The
Balance.
- Michael Denton: Evolution: A Theory in Crisis.
- David M. Raup: Extinction, Bad Genes or Bad Luck?
- Provine: Richard Dawkins: The Blind Watchmaker; River
Out of Eden.
- Daniel C. Dennett: Darwin's Dangerous Idea.
- Cambrian Explosion: Stephen Jay Gould, Wonderful Life.
- "When Life Expoded" pp. 66-74 in Time, Dec. 4,
l995.
- Critical Thinking Exercise: "The Hard Facts Wall"
in Teaching Science in a Climate of Controversy. (Available
from ARN)
return to top of page
Appendix l. Argumentation:
Major Diversionary Tactics, Fallacies and Forms of Invalid Reasoning
- Argumentum Ad Hominem: (Argument to the man) Shifting
the argument from the primary issue to the man's character, personality,
qualifications or religion. Used to distract attention from the
issue at hand.
- Fallacy of Equivocation: Using one term with two or
more different meanings, shifting from one meaning to the other
to suit the needs of the argument. Example: playing "shell
games" with words of broad and narrow meanings such as creation
and evolution.
- Faulty Analogy: An analogy that does not hold. No
analogy or model is perfect, so the degree of similarity is what
is important. Examples: (l) artificial selection (selective breeding)
and natural selection. (2) microevolution (genetic change in
populations) and macroevolution (new organs and body plans).
- Non sequitur: (It does not follow) Conclusion does
not follow from either the premises, the evidence presented,
or both.
return to top of page
Appendix 2: Definitions
of key terms used in the Debate
These definitions are offered to reduce problems of equivocation
or "shell games," using one meaning to establish another
for the purposes of public debate. In each context, ask yourself
which definition is being used.
Creation
- Broad Sense: The earth, life and humanity owe their
existence to a purposeful, intelligent Creator. (Only some interpretations
of evolution are incompatible with creation in the broad sense.)
- Narrow Sense:The earth, life and humanity were created
l0,000 years ago: young earth creationism/ creation science,
scientific creationism.
Evolution
- The Theory of Common Descent: All organisms have been
linked in the past by common ancestors. This theory is inferred
from the fossil record, anatomy, embryology, biochemistry, and
the distribution of living things
- Microevolution: Relatively minor variations that occur
in populations over time. (Observed in Peppered Moth coloration,
Galapagos Finch beaks, selective animal and plant breeding.)
- Macroevolution: Major innovations such as new organs,
structures, or body plans. (The Cambrian explosion: establishment
of the animal phyla)
- Darwinism (Neo-Darwinism): The belief that undirected
mechanistic processes (primarily random mutations and natural
selection) can account for both micro and macro evolution. A
key philosophical component of Darwinism is the assumption that
"evolution works without either plan or purpose" 1
and that it is "an unsupervised, impersonal, unpredictable,
and natural process." 2 Also known as "Evolutionism"
and "the Blind Watchmaker Thesis."
1Miller and Levine, Biology, Prentice Hall, l993, p.
658. (textbook)
2National Association of Biology Teachers 1995 Statement on The
Teaching of Evolution..
return to top of page
Copyright © 1996 Access Research Network.
All rights reserved. International copyright secured.
File Date: 5.23.96