Information icon.svg Survey Closing: The RationalWiki Community Survey 2017 will close this Friday, November 24th. See the results.

Talk:Infinite regress

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

I do not see how the view of nontheistic evolution does not also run into the issue of infinite regress. I see how a theist must appeal to the first cause and use it to explain itself, but how does the Darwinian evolutionist avoid the same pitfall? If the nontheistic evolutionist appeals to a rapid expansion of matter throughout the universe as the result of a significantly large application of energy, one immediately asks, "From where did the matter, the energy, or the space and time in which it occurred come?" If we appeal to an alternate universe colliding with this one as the source for the energy, the problem of the origin of the matter and of the alternate universe is still there. The Darwinian evolutionist and the intelligent design adherent both fall into infinite regression. So it seems the two views are in a stalemate within the context of the origin of the universe. User:Rb116

  • You do realize that the theory of evolution says absolutely nothing about the origins of the universe because it has nothing to do with that and instead deals with the diversification of species and such, right? What you're asking would be akin to someone saying that the theory of evolution tells us nothing about gravity... it's not supposed to. Perhaps you should first read up on what evolutionary theory actually says, instead of asking questions about things it doesn't cover in the first place. Nergali (talk) 04:25, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
    • Hey Nergali! No, I did not realize that Darwin's theory does not touch on origins of the universe. I have not finished his historic work on the origin of species yet. I was under the impression that he assumed a nontheistic origin to everything, and thus to species. You also did not mention the origin of species, you only mentioned "diversification," but Darwin also wrote about their origin.

The article did not fully explain how the two are so clearly distinct, and implied that there was some relation there. I think the confusion is in the article not specifying exactly what the creationist finds problematic with Darwin's theory that he or she feels the need to appeal to the origins of everything. I've yet to hear a creationist not talk about the origins of the universe when talking about the origins of species, and I've also yet to hear a Darwinian evolutionist not talk about the origins of the universe when talking about the origins of species.Rb116 (talk) 20:16, 4 February 2016 (UTC)