Richard Dawkins was an Oxford University Zoologist who wrote the book, “The Blind Watchmaker” in 1986. What Dawkins is saying in his book is that the process of natural selection only gives the appearance of a master designer, like a watchmaker, but there really is no plan or purpose in mind.
Dawkin’s theory is that variation or mutation, which is randomly occurring genetic changes, produced by haphazard events such as errors in copying the cell’s DNA in the process of reproduction, are usually neutral or harmful, but may sometimes slightly improve the organism’s ability to survive and reproduce. This then sets the stage for cumulative natural selection. Organisms tend to produce more offspring that survive to maturity and those offspring that have an advantageous mutation are expected to produce descendants themselves, than less advantageous of the species. The trait eventually spreads throughout the species, which then becomes the basis for further cumulative improvements in succeeding generations. With enough time and enough mutations of the right type, very complex organs and patterns of adaptive behaviour can eventually be produced in tiny cumulative steps, without the assistance of any pre-existing intelligence. It is a gradual process, achieving great innovations in minute cumulative steps.
Evolution generally means things change, that organisms are related to each other, or that new things appear from time to time. For those who support evolution there are only two possibilities
- creation-science, which they incorrectly assume denies any naturally occurring diversification and to predict that species will show no evidence of relationship, or
- evolution-science, which involves the blind watchmaker thesis and denies that God had a hand in the thinking of life. Nothing else.
But how should the Christian theist respond to the blind watchmaker thesis? It seems as though the theistic naturalists want Christians to accept it despite the lack of evidence because of some theological principle. Maybe they are saying that it is not possible to believe in a creator God even if the blind watchmaker thesis is true. Either way, there seems to be reluctance to challenge this thesis. It appears that any fight with science from a Christian point of view will lead to a loss and that we should not interfere with science.
The truth is the whole theory of evolution and the blind watchmaker thesis is not based on logic. There is no evidence to support them, and the blind watchmaker thesis is nothing more than naturalistic philosophy. However, scientists are not willing to accept and admit to this because they would have nothing to base macroevolution on. They would now have to search for a new theory. But this is unlikely because something that has no intelligence cannot develop into something with a highly complex, information rich system. When this is accepted, then our materialistic thinking will change.
The thinking is we did not come from God, but a blind watchmaker. But once this is proven absolutely false, then this thesis can easily be discarded and so too will the whole idea of evolution.
