Watson on the Bridgewater Treatises
In today's reading from Peter Watson's Ideas (New York : HarperCollins, 2005), the discussion turned on the idea, dawning in the first half of the 19th century, of the Earth's great antiquity. Geology was in the earliest stages of understanding the formation of the Earth, fossils of animals not like those of the day were starting to be understood as earlier forms long extinct, Noah's flood was coming to seem ever less likely, or even possible, as an historical event, and the bones of Neanderthals were discovered and recognized as related to modern humans.
In other words, the Biblical story of creation and its chronology of the Earth's history was being severely undermined and the cracks seemed to be spreading irreparably. This was the impetus for "The Bridgewater Treatises":
There were, however, a number of last-ditch attempts to marry the biblical narrative with the flood [pun almost certainly intended!] of scientific discoveries, and these culminated in a series of papers that became known as the Bridgewater Treatises. This strange and to the modern reader, deadly series was commissioned by the will of the Reverend Francis Henry Egerton, eighth earl of Bridgewater, a noble clergyman who had always neglected his parish assiduously and who died in 1829. Lord Bridgewater charged his executors, the archbishop of Canterbury, the bishop of London, and the president of the Royal Society, with the duty of selecting eight scientific authors, each from a main branch of the natural sciences, who were capable of demonstrating "the Power, Wisdom, and Goodness of God, as manifested in the Creation; illustrating such work by all reasonable arguments, as for instance, the variety and formation of God's creatures in the animal, vegetable and mineral kingdoms…." The eight 'scientific' authors chosen in fact comprised clergymen, physicians and geologists. None of them said anything that much advanced the debate but the very existence of the series showed how far some people were prepared to go to try to keep science in its place. Among the arguments used were the view that the universe is so improbable statistically that 'divine direction' must be at work, and that our world is so benevolent that it can only have been made by God–examples included the observation that fish have eyes specially suited to marine vision, that iron ore is always discovered in the neighbourhood of coal, by means of which it can be smelted, and so on. In the final treatise, Dr Thomas Chalmers insisted that the very existence of a conscience among men, the very notion of morality, was 'conclusive evidence of an exquisite and divinely established harmony….' [pp. 636–637]
I don't know that I was surprised, but I was quite interested to learn about the Bridgewater Treatises and what we might call the great antiquity of modern arguments used by religious apologists.
You did notice, I'm sure, the idea that "the universe is so improbable statistically that 'divine direction' must be at work", which has been very popular with modern biblical creationists, currently known as intelligent-designers, who delight in expending a great amount of effort in scholastic pursuits to calculate a very large number that they are convinced represents the improbability of their own existence, thus demonstrating its improbability. This, they believe, is an unassailable proof of their existence of their creator-god.
Not only that, but you also noticed, I'm sure, that bit about how perfectly "designed" is the natural world. Iron always found near coal sounds pretty persuasive to me, right up there with corkscrew flagella and the ever popular appeal to the eye.
How interesting, then, to discover that some of their favorite arguments against evolution–and thus against science itself–all predated the widespread acceptance of the idea of evolution, not to mention evolution by natural selection. Arguments in search of a target or the evolution of the so-called debate about evolution? Neither really speaks well in favor of the apologists and their creativity.
And then, for extra credit as it were, a surprisingly modern argument against atheism: that without God there can be no morality, indeed, no idea even of morality. That argument had long been discredited already.
Perhaps someday these tired and empty ideas will stay on the trash-heap of history where they belong, although it might not happen soon. Even Bridgewater's posthumous wish has its own modern analogs–witness the Templeton Prize:
Just as knowledge in science, medicine, cosmology and other disciplines has grown exponentially during the past century, the Templeton Prize honors and encourages the many entrepreneurs trying various ways for discoveries and breakthroughs to expand human perceptions of divinity and to help in the acceleration of divine creativity.
The prize is the legacy of Sir John Templeton, a man of obviously traditional ideas and with too much money that he couldn't take with him. The prize is "a sum in the amount of £820,000 sterling", "awarded annually on the decision of a panel of judges from the major religions of the world today."
One Response
Subscribe to comments via RSS
Subscribe to comments via RSS
Leave a Reply
To thwart spam, comments by new people are held for moderation; give me a bit of time and your comment will show up.
I welcome comments -- even dissent -- but I will delete without notice irrelevant, rude, psychotic, or incomprehensible comments, particularly those that I deem homophobic, unless they are amusing. The same goes for commercial comments and trackbacks. Sorry, but it's my blog and my decisions are final.
on Thursday, 6 March 2008 at 00.03
Permalink
I suspect their need to propound natural law, creation science and to rail at evolution arises from feeling threatened. And that's due to their insistence on taking the Bible literally.
I suspect Bible literalism is taught early in life, along with fear of God and other manifestation of heavily authoritarian parenting.
If I'm right there will be no changing their notions, ever. Some form of more or less peaceful coexistence is about the best that can be hoped for.