The hypothesis of Evolutionary theory is itself a tautology, it is a statement of simple Mathematical truth: Given anything that can reproduce itself, those who is more fitted for reproduction would have more ‘children’ then those who is less fitted. How can we tell the nature of reproductive fitness? We often do so by looking at the result of reproductive fitness itself, that certainly sound like a circular argument itself. The inherent difficulty of theory of evolution as a science is similar to History: Because we can’t do any historical experiment, and the question of external validity remain a headache for theory of evolution. It is difficult to exactly reproduce the historical condition when evolution happen, nor an experiment can be used to predict what has happened in the past.
Because evolution process had already happen, we simply can’t re-run the history to see what would happen otherwise, what we can do is to suggest the pathway which it may follow. However, there is always more than one pathway to arrive at the current result, therefore even if we manage to disprove one pathway doesn’t mean there is no way to get from here to there except by supernatural means. It is analogue to the idea of naturalism would can never disprove: How can anything beyond nature happened within the realm of nature? How to draw up an hypothesis or experiment that can give definite test to the theory of evolution itself? In what way we can disprove the process of evolution? In what way we can disprove tautology?
2008年9月17日 星期三
More thoughts on evolutionary theory
標籤:
自然主義,
無神論,
進化論,
演化論,
數學,
Atheism,
creationism,
Evolutionary theory,
Mathematics,
naturalism
訂閱:
張貼留言 (Atom)
沒有留言:
張貼留言