1887
Volume 11, Issue 2
  • ISSN 1018-2101
  • E-ISSN: 2406-4238

Abstract

Key arguments in J.P. Moreland’s that purport to provide a scientific basis for creationism as an alternative to evolutionary theory are examined. Arguments based on Bayes’ theorem, the existence of intracable mathematical problems, the close correspondence between the actual values of basic physical constants and those required for the existence of life, the second law of thermodynamics, the nature of infinity, the specified complexity of DNA, and the human-specificity of language are analyzed and found wanting. In general, the arguments are seen to fail as a result of confusions in word usage or meaning, sometimes of a very elementary nature. The scientific, philosophical, and ethical implications of the overall argument’s failure and the reasons for it are discussed.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/prag.11.2.04cus
2001-01-01
2019-10-22
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/prag.11.2.04cus
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Argumentation , Creationism , Evolution , Fundamentalist theology and Scientific method
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error