David Brooks of the New York Times writes this week on the evolution of the God debate. The essay is moderately interesting, in the usual David Brooks-ish sort of way: state a problem or challenge, then characterize with an ivory towered, pink-shirted / pink-tie-wearing characteristic simplicity -- i.e. in a narrow way that is then easy to ridicule. (Seriously, can someone please send him a new tie?).
Even better than the article though are the letters to the editor. Here's my favorite:
As an engineer, lawyer, computer programmer and Roman Catholic, I have a problem with the concept that the evolution of the species just happened. From an evolutionary perspective, we are probably somewhere in the chicken and egg debate.
As man supposedly evolved from a single-cell amoeba to the complex organism that he is today, we had to develop a complex brain to manage the process.
The first problem facing a self-developing species in its early stages would be the need to know that there is something out there to see, feel, hear, touch or taste. The second problem is that a complex brain could not survive the incredibly complex development process without the five senses in operational mode. And you can't get the senses in operational mode until you have developed a sophisticated brain with the ability to communicate and interact with the senses.
Therein lies our chicken and egg dilemma.
Ken LeBrun
Stony Brook, N.Y., May 13, 2008
Note to self: Since I happen to think that a solid grasp of logic is critical for engineering, lawyering, and especially programming, think twice before hiring Mr. LeBrun as an engineer, lawyer, or programmer.
Leave a comment