undefined | Better HN

0 pointsrtkwe5y ago0 comments

No you're misunderstanding, what I think they're saying is that things like evolution, big bang, etc are the mechanisms of god, i.e. god set all this in motion. It's an easy way to integrate science and religion so long as you're not a biblical (or whatever the equivalent in your religion is) literalist. Maybe god did setup this universe like a giant clockwork toy and all we're discovering are the gears and springs of the universe. Discoveries and inventions are still the work of people but the cause of all the natural forces just ultimately trace back to god.

It leaves a little crack open for divinity and it's a lot around a question of why; why'd the big bang happen? why are the physical constants of the universe right in a series of bands such that stars, planets and everything else eventually formed? etc. It's a question parallel to science that has a lot of answers for what happens where this is more of a philosophical question of why.

0 comments

eska5y ago

That contradicts with the article. The article states that the Muslim scholar theorized that god actively mutates the animals that want to adapt, i.e. god didn't just invent "the mechanism" of mutation, as you say.

pvaldes5y ago

> Muslim scholar theorized that god actively mutates the animals that want to adapt,

This theory is a pastiche trying to use the "good parts" from Darwinism and is clearly worse than the original

Anybody claiming this, just don't have a deep understanding of mutations. Mutations are not a god's gift. Maths and science predict that they happen randomly, and most of the time they carry terrible consequences.

Lets take for example the people that inherited the butterfly skin syndrome. With a so fragile skin that it rips from the shoulder to the waistline at the minimum brush. Do this girl or this boy wanted to "adapt" to have a insufferable pain all the days of this life?

I seriously doubt that anybody would have asked for that. Lets be serious.

throwaway123x25y ago

I mean it predated Darwin by a lot, we shouldn't be surprised it has its faults.

rtkweOP5y ago

I was talking in a more general sense not about the specific mechanism in the article, more about the general way science and religion can at least coexist somewhat coherently which is something a lot of online athiests perplexed by.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse