Edward O. Wilson's Intelligent Evolution

Edward O. Wilson, in his essay Intelligent Evolution, diagnoses the “gap between science and faith-based religion” as “tectonic” (556), and predicts the continuous expansion of the gap. This gap appears most vividly in the field of biology, over the question of the origin of species of life on the Earth. The scientific answer to this question is the theory of evolution, which explains that the force of nature, called natural selection, has shaped and diversified the species of life on the Earth. However, Christians viewed the theory of evolution as a threat to their fundamental dogma: the existence of a single almighty deity, who has created life in the forms they exist today. In response, creationists utilized scientific methodologies and

This is exactly the goal that the advocates of Intelligent Design aspired to achieve. According to the Center of Science and Culture, a group in support of intelligent design, “the theory of intelligent design is simply an effort to empirically detect whether the apparent design in nature ... is genuine design (the product of an intelligent cause) or is simply the product of an undirected process such as natural selection” (“What is Intelligent Design?”). Stephen C. Meyer, the program director of the center, argues that intelligent design is true because biological systems, such as flagella of bacterial cells, are “irreducibly complex.” He claims that evolution, which depends on “tiny incremental mutations,” could not have shaped the motor which cannot function with even one in thirty protein parts lacking (“Not by chance”). However, his argument does not qualify as a scientific evidence; it is merely an impression. The theory of evolution allows a seemingly useless gene to survive over generations if it does not endanger the survival of organisms containing it, during which it may gradually become significant. Hence, the argument of irreducible complexity, which is the core argument of intelligent design, does not threaten the validity of the theory of evolution. In the end, creationists have failed

The authority of creationism is religious, which means it does not come from proof by observations. Wilson writes that for religion “there is no evidence, no theory, and no criteria for proof that even marginally might pass for science” (552). Indeed, an explanation without evidence is nothing more than a hypothesis to a scientist. Nevertheless, it can qualify as a dictum to a faithful Christian. Unlike the case for science, there is a unanimous agreement between Christians that the Bible is the fundamental source of religious authority. To Christians, the Bible is the word of God, and it is beyond the logic of verification and falsification; it is a matter of faith. Moreover, the authority of a religious dogma is absolute: two different dogmas cannot coexist in a single religion. For instance, Christianity split into the Catholic church and the Protestant church over indulgence, and Islam split into Shi'ism and Sunnism over the next Khalifa. These historical events show that maintenance of religious purity is a vital condition, otherwise possibly resulting in a bloody