The week’s The Economist magazine ran a story titled “Evolution and Religion: In The Beginning,” which explored the global controversy over Darwinism and Intelligent Design. The article also mentioned Turkey’s first ID conference, and my work, as follows:
Whatever the defeats they have suffered on home ground, American foes of Darwin seem to be gaining influence elsewhere. In February several luminaries of the anti-evolution movement in the United States went to Istanbul for a grand conference where Darwin’s ideas were roundly denounced. The organiser of the gathering was a Turkish Muslim author and columnist, Mustafa Akyol, who forged strong American connections during a fellowship at the Discovery Institute.
To the dismay of some Americans and the delight of others, Mr Akyol was invited to give evidence (against Darwin’s ideas) at hearings held by the Kansas school board in 2005 on how science should be taught. Mr Akyol, an advocate of reconciliation between Muslims and the West who is much in demand at conferences on the future of Islam, is careful to distinguish his position from that of the extravagant publishing venture in his home city. “They make some valid criticisms of Darwinism, but I disagree with most of their other views,” insists the young author, whose other favourite cause is the compatibility between Islam and Western liberal ideals, including human rights and capitalism. But a multi-layered anti-Darwin movement has certainly brought about a climate in Turkey and other Muslim countries that makes sure challenges to evolution theory, be they sophisticated or crude, are often well received.
I recently read your essay “Why Muslims Should Support Intelligent Design” and found myself in complete agreement with your concerns about Materialism and the potential for cooperation between Christians and Muslims to make this a better world.
However I beg you to reconsider your alignment with the Intelligent Design movement. Here are the major issues – and I’m sure these are not new to you:
1) Many (millions of) Christians are not part of the ID movement – you can have plenty of Christian allies without embracing ID.
2) The ID movement is primarily a means for pushing Creationist ideas under the guise of “science”
3) “Evolution” is NOT “Dawinism” – I can very comfortably use Darwin’s ideas to investigate the world without abandoning my Christian faith. So can millions of others.
4) It would be tragic for Islam, with its wonderful history of scientific thought, to join in promoting this radically unscientific view of the world.
Please understand, I have no moral objection to the beliefs of those in the ID movement. But their goal is to impose those beliefs on the scientific community. That is tragically wrong.
Contrary to what it seems like when the subject comes up neither the “scientific community” nor the ID comunity are unified within their own fields of speculation. Anti ID people oversimplify their opponents in order to mock them. They ignore sophisticated writers like Phillip Johnson (Darwin on Trial.) They completely fail to explain the functions of the mind; and yet claim to know “everything.” They are uncomfortable with the fact that most of existence is a mystery and that every discovery inevitably uncovers new questions. It is not true that the ID people are trying to “impose” their beliefs on everyone else; well, maybe some are, but then materialists are equally trying to impose theirs. ID proponents reasonably hope that their beliefs can be acknowledged so that students and citizens will be allowed to think beyond materialism.
re: Dave Mattes comment:
You state that ” Anti ID people oversimplify their opponents in order to mock them.”. You then go on to do exactly just that without giving any evidence for your beliefs. To give a few examples …
Scientists do not claim to know everything. In fact, a researcher’s main goal is to study an aspect of the physical world that is either not known or not understood. And, contrary to your assumption, scientists delight in uncovering new questions. That’s what makes their job fun.
A person who understands evolutionary theory is not necessarily a materialist (as the poster above you implied).
ID is a complete nonsense.
Square water melons and genetically engineered food are samples that once in a while, life is created. Not a proof, but a plausibility.
Intelligent Design, Incompetence Design, Guided Evolution, Pure Evolution. Which one do you believe in?