Man vs God

Due Date: Wednesday, September 23

Read the packet from the Wall Street Journal titled "Man vs. God"

Although the packet has Karen Armstrong's article first - read Richard Dawkins articles first.

1) After you have read the articles: write the main thesis / argument for each and then give as many of the main supporting arguments for each. I suggest that you take notes as you go so you can formulate the argument after you've read.

Dawkins- Evolution created this world, and if there was a god he would be very bored with nothing to do because evolution did everything. There could be more life out there but it is probably very basic. Dawkins doesn't know if there is life elsewhere or if it is just Earth. He also states that scientists change their formulas and theorems all the time to include new information. This modifies what was true before, therefore we don't really know what is true for sure. He shows he believes a god did not create the planet when he states, "Making the universe is the one thing no intelligence, however superhuman, could do, because an intelligence is complex-statistically improbable-and therefore had to emerge by gradual degrees...(2)" He says everything on our earth started simple and became more complex as time went on. He also believes there may be more generative processes besides Darwinism and evolution, but we haven't discovered them yet. He writes it is ok to believe in a God, and that science shouldn't try to persuade someone to give up their beliefs. He is accepting of all theories.

Armstrong-She states that Dawkins and the theory of evolution was harsh almost insulting to people of the Christian religion and others. When religions talk about God, he is merely a bigger spiritual power than ourselves. She states that by the end of the 17th century Sir Isaac Newton had proven there was a larger power. Christians became dependent on the fact they could prove God existed. Then Darwinism came about and it disproved their theories, so they lost faith because they became too science dependent. Before modern religion God was uncomprehensible, so was talked about with symbols. St.Augustine stated that if a religious text conflicted with scientific theory, it would be represented allegorically, or with symbols. More recently, however Christians began literally reading the religious texts. Greeks developed two ways for reading these texts: logos and mythos. They worked together to help one understand religious teachings. Logos corresponds with reality, and helps us function in our everyday life. Mythos helps us with emotions, or feelings that can't be answered with logical answers. Mythos was like the early psychology. Cosmology helped people discover attributes deep inside themselves that weren't always obvious to the conscious mind. She states that religion doesn't provide us with explanations we can understand, but helps us live peacefully in our world.

2) Also as you read make notes of what is most intriguing and / or interesting to you. Give at least one example of something that made you "think".

Dawkins-Dawkins surprised me when he said that no intelligent superhuman could create the universe. To me, it would seem that if a being was "superhuman" it could do more than a human could, therefore being able to create the universe. In some of his statements and points he seemed a bit contradictory. I wasn't always sure whether he fully supported the science side or the religious side.

Armstrong- She states that religion is like an art form, that allows us to think in a different way. "At its best, it holds us in an attitude of wonder...(2)" She is not trying to say religion is right and evolution is wrong. She is just stating they are both ways of thinking about the world. This is like what I have heard before, but it was interesting to read that she was not all fired up and angry that someone could undermine religion by saying God did not create the world.

3) Finally, develop a ToK approach to the reading. What is the "knowledge" presented by each of the authors.

Both authors present points that go all the way to Part 4 of what knowledge is. This means they provide evidence for what people believe, and briefly talk about how scientists have proven to people both sides of the evolution argument. The scientific article provides empirical evidence while the religion article provides a bit of empirical evidence by using historical facts, but mostly provides metaphysical evidence when talking about the beliefs of different religions.