만약 생명(life)이 결국 우연히 무작위적 과정에 의해 만들어진 결과라면, 생각(thought) 또한 우연히 만들어졌을 것이다. (당신이 지금 생각하고 있는 것을 포함하여) 당신의 생각은 결국 오랜 기간 일어난 일련의 우연한 사고들(accidents)의 결과인 것이다. 그러므로 생명은 우연히 저절로 발생하였다는 당신의 생각도 유효성이 없다 (틀렸을 수 있다).1 관념(idea)에 대한 유효성이 파괴됨으로서, 진화론은 진화론이라는 관념까지도 파괴하고 있다.
우리 모두는 자주 사람은 정신 능력의 단지 작은 일부만을 사용하고 있다는 말을 들어왔다.2 만약 이것이 사실이라면, 그러한 사용되지 않는 능력들은 어떻게 진화되었는가? 자연선택에 의해서는 아님이 확실하다. 왜냐하면 그러한 능력들은 사용되지 않았기 때문이다. 왜 사람의 정신(생각)은 진화론적 성공보다 더 초과된 과정(능력)들을 가지고 있는가? 3
*참조 : Consciousness: a problem for naturalism
References and Notes
1. 'But then arises the doubt, can the mind of man, which has, as I fully believe, been developed from a mind as low as that possessed by the lowest animals, be trusted when it draws such grand conclusions? I cannot pretend to throw the least light on such abstruse problems.” Charles Darwin, The Life and Letters, Vol. 1, p. 313.
'For if my mental processes are determined wholly by the motions of atoms in my brain, I have no reason to suppose that my beliefs are true. They may be sound chemically, but that does not make them sound logically. And hence I have no reason for supposing my brain to be composed of atoms.” J. B. S. Haldane, Possible Worlds (London: Chatto & Windus, 1927), p. 209.
'If the solar system was brought about by an accidental collision, then the appearance of organic life on this planet was also an accident, and the whole evolution of Man was an accident too. If so, then all our present thoughts are mere accidents - the accidental by-product of the movement of atoms. And this holds for the thoughts of the materialists and astronomers as well as for anyone else’s. But if their thoughts - i. e. of Materialism and Astronomy - are merely accidental by-products, why should we believe them to be true? I see no reason for believing that one accident should be able to give me a correct account of all the other accidents.” C. S. Lewis, God In the Dock (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1970), pp. 52-53.
'Each particular thought is valueless if it is the result of irrational causes. Obviously, then, the whole process of human thought, what we call Reason, is equally valueless if it is the result of irrational causes. Hence every theory of the universe which makes the human mind a result of irrational causes is inadmissible, for it would be a proof that there are no such things as proofs. Which is nonsense. But Naturalism [evolution], as commonly held, is precisely a theory of this sort.” C. S. Lewis, Miracles (New York: Macmillan Publishing Co., 1947), p. 21.
C. S. Lewis, 'The Funeral of a Great Myth,” Christian Reflections (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1968), p. 89.
'If the universe is a universe of thought, then its creation must have been an act of thought.” James H. Jeans, The Mysterious Universe, new revised edition (New York: Macmillan Publishing Co., 1932), p. 181.
'A theory that is the product of a mind can never adequately explain the mind that produced the theory. The story of the great scientific mind that discovers absolute truth is satisfying only so long as we accept the mind itself as a given. Once we try to explain the mind as a product of its own discoveries, we are in a hall of mirrors with no exit.” Phillip E. Johnson, Reason in the Balance: The Case Against Naturalism in Science, Law & Education (Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press, 1995), p. 62.
'One of the absurdities of materialism [the belief that nothing exists except the material] is that it assumes that the world can be rationally comprehensible only if it is entirely the product of irrational, unguided mechanisms.” Phillip E. Johnson, 'The Wedge in Evolutionary Ideology: It's History, Strategy, and Agenda,” Theology Matters, Vol. 5, No. 2, March/April 1999, p. 5.
Phillip E. Johnson has also made the point that intelligence might produce intelligence. However, for lifeless, inorganic matter to produce intelligence, as the theory of evolution claims, would be an astounding miracle.
2.. A possible example of this occurs when half a patient's brain is removed and the remaining half gradually takes over most functions of the removed half. Many such operations are successfully performed each year. The brain has a flexibility and redundancy not explained by evolution but consistent with creation.
3. Darwin recognized this problem.
'Behind Darwin's discomfiture [on how the human brain evolved] was the dawning realization that the evolution of the brain vastly exceeded the needs of prehistoric man. This is, in fact, the only example in existence where a species was provided with an organ that it still has not learned how to use.” Richard M. Restak, The Brain: The Last Frontier (Garden City, New York: Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1979), p. 59.
*한국창조과학회 자료실/창조의 신비/생명의 신비