Reasons for resisting Darwinism, and why they should not be credited

Attfield, Robin 2021. Reasons for resisting Darwinism, and why they should not be credited. Open Theology 7 (1) , pp. 129-139. 10.1515/opth-2020-0153

PDF - Published Version Available under License Creative Commons Attribution. Download (405kB)

Abstract

Plantinga argues that Darwinism implies that we cannot help adopting our apparently reflective beliefs, and that this is a reason for rejecting Darwinism. I argue that similar arguments apparently apply to the beliefs crucial to deliberation, meaningful work, meaningful relationships, meaningful communication and creativity. But these arguments apply to deterministic versions of Darwinism only. Cogent non-deterministic versions have been propounded by Popper, Rose, Lewontin, Ward and Miller (those of Ward and Miller being theistic versions). These versions are presented, as is Midgley’s account of how evolution has endowed us with a mix of desires that prepare the way for choice. Plantinga-type arguments pose no problem for such non-deterministic Darwinisms.

Item Type:	Article
Date Type:	Publication
Status:	Published
Schools:	English, Communication and Philosophy
ISSN:	2300-6579
Date of First Compliant Deposit:	7 September 2021
Date of Acceptance:	6 April 2021
Last Modified:	17 May 2023 03:34
URI:	https://orca.cardiff.ac.uk/id/eprint/143916

Actions (repository staff only)

Edit Item