The Evolution Paradigm - everything including the origin
and complexity of life can be explained with the laws of biology, chemistry, math, and
physics. The earth is about 4.7 billion years old. If God exists, man cannot observe
anything that he does. The evolution paradigm is based on two axioms.
The observable axiom - scientists can
accurately observe reality and from these observations develop models, theories and laws
to describe it.
The naturalistic axiom - reality can be fully explained
with the laws of biology, chemistry, math and physics.
The Literalist Paradigm - God created the universe and the
earth in 6 days less than ten thousand years ago. The axiom is based on a literal
interpretation of the creation story found in the Bible. The literalist paradigm is based
on a two axioms.
The existence axiom - God exists.
The literal axiom - God wanted the creation story found
in Genesis to be interpreted literally because it is a scientifically
accurate account of creation. The literal axiom and the observable axiom are mutually
exclusive. If one is true then the other must be false.
The Creation Science Paradigm - this paradigm shares the
beliefs of the literalist paradigm with one important exception. This paradigm relies on
three axioms: the existence axiom, the literal axiom and the observable axiom. This
paradigm is inconsistent with basic logic. It is like claiming that the earth must be a
cube, because some of the scientific evidence that suggests that it is a sphere has been
misinterpreted. It just does not make any sense to do this. The literal axiom is strong
enough to stand on its own. It is self evident to many people, and it does not need
science to back it up. Creation scientists spend way too much time trying to prove the
literal axiom by questioning the validity of scientific theories and techniques.
The Day Age Paradigm - Each day in Genesis should not be
interpreted as a 24 hour day. The days represent long periods of time. This allows the
earth and universe to be old. It also accommodates the fossil record, because with this
interpretation one would expect simple animals to appear first. God is responsible for
creation but he used evolution as a tool. This paradigm is based on the observable axiom,
the existence axiom and the inspired axiom.
The inspired axiom - the Bible is the
inspired word of God. It should therefore be read very carefully, but different
interpretations of scripture are possible. There are two flavors of the inspired axiom -
one interprets the word inspired to mean that God did not allow any errors during or since
the inspiration. The other allows for man to introduce errors. With the first
interpretation, the Bible is the word of God. With the second, the Bible is man’s
interpretation of God’s word.
The Gap Paradigm - Each day in Genesis is a 24 hour day,
but the days are separated by long expanses of time. Like the day age theory, this allows
for the old age of the earth. Unlike the day age theory, it allows less freedom for God to
use evolution as a tool. This paradigm is based on the observable, the existence and
inspired axioms.
The Allegory Paradigm - the amount of work that God needed
to undertake to create the universe, the galaxies, stars, and life is almost infinite. If
Genesis attempted to describe all of these events, then the Bible would require several
billion pages of text. And God would have to spend an incredible amount of time explaining
concepts like probability, physics, DNA, and chemistry to Moses. So God never intended for
the story to be scientifically accurate. The story is an allegory. The key points are
symbolized in the form of a story whose purpose is to describe man’s relationship to
God. The allegory paradigm relies on the existence, the inspired and the observable
axioms.
The Intelligent Design Paradigm - a designer created the
universe and the earth. The earth is about 4.7 billion years old. The designer created
life on earth 3 billion years ago. Since then, the designer has continued to guide many of
the changes. It is this guidance that explains most of the information found in life
today. Evolution and natural selection are responsible for the optimization and
maintenance of information, but not its creation. The intelligent design paradigm is based
on the observable axiom. This paradigm does not require a specific Biblical
interpretation, so it is not restricted to Christianity. This is why the word designer
instead of God is used to describe the paradigm.
It is also interesting to note that this paradigm does not
use the existence axiom. The paradigm does not assume that God exists. Instead it relies
on the observation axiom to determine whether or not a designer exists. The intelligent
design paradigm is the only paradigm based on a single axiom, and it is the only paradigm
that can be falsified (the naturalistic axiom prevents the evolution paradigm from being
disproved). If the puzzles of life’s origin and its evolution are solved next year,
then the intelligent design paradigm is false. If this happens, supporters of this
paradigm will either fall back to the evolution paradigm or be forced to adopt the
existence axiom.
Paradigm |
Existence
Axiom |
Observable
Axiom |
Literal Axiom |
Inspired
Axiom |
Naturalistic
Axiom |
Can be
disproved |
Intelligent
Design |
|
X |
|
|
|
X |
Evolution |
|
X |
|
|
X |
|
Literal |
X |
|
X |
|
|
|
Gap |
X |
X |
|
X |
|
|
Day Age |
X |
X |
|
X |
|
|
Allegory |
X |
X |
|
X |
|
|
Creation
Science |
X |
X |
X |
|
|
|
From this table, it should be clear that most people find the observable axiom and the
existence axiom self evident. It should also be clear that all but one paradigm require
two or more axioms. Because all axioms are assumptions based on faith, it is always
desirable to minimize the number of axioms required to construct a paradigm.
All of these axioms are on equal footing with each other. All are assumptions. None can
be proved or disproved. And not a single axiom is self evident to everybody. To most
scientists, the observable axiom is self evident. To all Christians, the existence axiom
is self evident. The remainder of this chapter will focus on the naturalistic axiom.
Science relies heavily on the naturalistic axiom. This does not mean that all
scientists are atheists. But it does mean that they are only allowed to consider
naturalistic explanations when they propose theories to explain their observations. This
approach has served science very well. But it does have a potentially fatal flaw - if
there is a Creator, then science cannot find Him. The axiom forces this possibility to be
ruled out before the evidence is considered.
With the use of indirect logic, science does not require the naturalistic axiom. So
this exclusion seems to be more for convenience and politics than for necessity.
home: Intelligent Design or Evolution?
next: The Scientific
Method