わかりやすいインテリジェントデザインの説明と言えば、本山たるDiscovery Instituteよりも、Calvert弁護士と生化学なDr.HarrisのIntelligent Design Networkである:
Those who believe that life is an occurrence are materialists. Those who believe that life reflects design are teleologists. A teleologist is one step removed from a theist. A materialist is one step removed from an atheist. If we are teleologists our views about religion, government and ethics will likely be very different from those of materialists. So, should science and government lead us to be materialists or teleologists, or should they simply fully inform us so that we may make our own "informed decision" about the matter?

生物が出来事であると思っている人々は唯物論者です。生物がデザインを反映したものだと思っている人々は目的論者です。目的論者は有神論者から一歩離れた人です。唯物論者は無神論者から一歩離れた人です。私たちが目的論者なら、宗教や政府や倫理についての見方は、唯物論者のものとは大きく異なるでしょう。では、科学と政府は私たちを唯物論者に導くべきでしょうか?それとも目的論者に導くべきでしょうか? あるいは私たち自身が「情報に基づいた決定」ができるように、問題について私たちに完全に情報を知らしめるだけにすべきでしょうか?


The stark contrast between the teleologist and the materialist is simply made by Lewis in his observation that:
The first big division of humanity is into the majority, who believe in some kind of God or gods, and the minority who do not. On this point, Christianity lines up with the majority -- lines up with ancient Greeks, and Romans, modern savages, Stoics, Platonists, Hindus, Mohammendans, etc., against the modern Western European materialist.[C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity: What One Must Believe to be a Christian, p.43]

[John H. Calvert: "Are we designs or occurrences?--Should science and government prejudge the question?
さすがはJohn H. Calvert法学博士である。とっても明確だ。目的論とは「生物がデザインを反映したもの」という考えで、あと一歩で有神論というポジション。すなわち目的論とは「デザイナーを特定しないインテリジェントデザイン」そのものを指すようだ。


さて、インテリジェントデザインの父たるPhillip Johnsonはどうかと言えば:
At one time the Catholic natural law philosophy of Thomas Aquinas and his followers dominated European thinking, but its metaphysical foundations were undermined as science replaced Aristotelian teleology and Catholic theology with a materialist worldview that considers only efficient causes.



Richard Dawkins merely states in unvarnished form doctrines that other scientific metaphysicians take for granted: In the beginning were the particles and the impersonal laws of physics; life evolved by a mindless, non-teleological process in which God played no part; and human beings are just another animal species. Human thoughts and actions are caused by synapses firing in the brain. To claim a special status for humans is to commit the sin of speciesism, a self-serving prejudice that could hardly arise in a culture without culpable rationalizations.

[Phillip E. Johnson: "Metaphysics Matters", First Things 97, November 1, 1999]
Phillip Johnsonによれば、「神様の役割がない」ことが「非目的論的」らしい。というか"Non-theological"と間違えてるようだ。

ついでだが、「人間の思考と行動は脳内のシナプスの発火によるもの」を並べ立てていることから、Phillip Johnsonは物質としての脳と相互作用しているエンティティを想定していることは明らか。おそらく、それはシナプスネットワークによって記述されるソフトウェアのようなものではなく、非物質的かつ実体として存在する魂。


Ken Hamが主宰する最もアクティブな"若い地球の創造論"サイトAnswers in Genesisはもうちょっとまともだ:
Teleology (explaining present structure in terms of its future purpose) is supposed to have died when Darwin showed that the ‘appearance of design’ could be explained by natural selection. No purpose is needed, just a blind process of random change that is selected for survival by the environment. [2004/9]


Darwin 'refuted cosmic teleology' (that is, that the universe has a purpose). The existence of the universe is just a giant accident; it has no purpose. [1995/9]


Any view of origins is inherently teleological, i.e. concerned with why, not just how! Science persons have long disregarded teleology as being legitimate, but no view of origins exists without it.[1979/10]

CalvertやPhillip Johnsonの主張が神なしに成り立たないのに対して、こっちは神様がいなくても成り立つ論になっている。「現在の構造を未来の目的によって説明する目的論」というのも明瞭だ。

Kheper website

たまたま、Kheper website: Theleologyというページに"Theistic (Dualistic) Teleology"という項目があるのを見つけた:
Monotheistic Creationism, which holds the existence of an external deity who has designed the world, represents Dualistic Teleology. In Christian theology, teleology represents a basic argument for the existence of God, in that the order and efficiency of the natural world seem not to be accidental. If the world design is intelligent, an ultimate Designer must exist. This is the so-called argument by design that was used by theologians right up until Darwin's day. The teleological argument for the existence of God holds that order in the world could not be accidental and that since there is design there must be a designer. e.g. if you see a watch lying in the sand you assume someone built it (in a factory, say) because it is inconceivable that such a complex structure could arise by chance. Similarily it is argued that complex things like living beings could not have possibly arisen through chance.


Teleologists, like Vitalists, oppose mechanistic interpretations of the universe that rely solely on organic development or natural causation. Darwin's theories of evolution, which hold that species develop by natural selection, was devestating to teleolgy, because it showed that complex structures like living organisms could arise through "chance". Teleological arguments for Design were revived however during the upsurge of creationist sentiment in the early 1980s onwards


どうもこれが正しい解釈のように思われる。インテリジェントデザインの主張はまさにこの目的論に該当している。また、「目的論は、ダーウィンが見かけのデザインは自然選択で説明できると示したときに、死んだと思われる」というKen Hamたちの主張も、指し示すのはWilliam Paleyのデザイン論である。

ちなみに同じKheper website: TheleologyにはProcess Teleologyという目的論も挙げられている。これは生物や宇宙の進化が、内在的な力によって導かれるものであり、進化には到達点があるというもの。その到達点こそ神であると言ったら、オメガポイント理論になる。





posted by Kumicit at 2007/03/04 09:49 | Comment(0) | TrackBack(0) | Creationism | このブログの読者になる | 更新情報をチェックする



コメント: [必須入力]