God, Gould, and the Panda's Thumb

Dados Bibliográficos

ID3551908
AutoresStephen Dilley (Discovery Institute, autor correspondente)
Ano2023
Volume14
Fascículo8
Páginas1006
Data de publicação2023-08-07
Peer ReviewedSim
Open AccessSim
TipoARTICLE
PeriódicoReligions (JOURNAL)
Identificadores do periódicoISSN: 2077-1444 • E-ISSN: 2077-1444
EditoraMDPI AG (PUBLISHER • IT)
DOI10.3390/rel14081006
OpenAlexW4385636866
IdiomaEN
Citações recebidas1
Referências citadas36

The panda's thumb argument, championed by the late Stephen Jay Gould, stands as one of the most famous polemics for common ancestry. In this essay, I analyze Gould's argument in several steps. First, I attempt to reconstruct the argument in both deductive and likelihood formulations. I contend that both versions of the argument rest on a theological claim-namely, that God would not (likely) create or allow a suboptimal panda's thumb. I then argue that a wide range of people are not rationally obligated to accept this theological claim. Next, I give special attention to the likelihood formulation's emphasis on a contrastive argument for evolution over special creation. I contend that a great number of people are not rationally obligated to accept this formulation either. I next consider and reply to an objection that Gould never intended the panda argument as an apologetic for evolution (and an attack on special creation) but rather as a critique of adaptationism. Finally, I argue that the panda argument conflicts with Gould's broader views about the human mind and the relationship between theology and science. I also note along the way that the shortcomings of the panda argument apply to a number of other arguments for evolutionary theory. To be sure, I do not criticize evolution itself or the comprehensive grounds for it. Instead, my primary aims are to analyze the panda argument and suggest that caution is in order about similar arguments as well

Epistemology · Rule of thumb · Teleological argument · Computer Science · Evolution and Science Education · Evolutionary Game Theory and Cooperation · Philosophy · Philosophy and History of Science