Abiogenesis. Science and/or faith
Posted: Fri Mar 23, 2007 1:55 am
This thread splits from
http://discussions.godandscience.org/vi ... 4269#44269
The aim is to collect and scrutinize different scenarios for abiogenesis in science and faith.
The original discussion was with Byblos while of course others are welcome to add comments.
I think we can start by listing facts that we know and on which we should agree and possible scenarios to be considered.
Then we can compare and discuss different scenarios, just to see if we could agree on something.
This should provide a representation of current knowledge from different point of views.
As I said in the past I personally think we know too few about abiogenesis yet to obtained a universal agreement but at least we should be able to cut down some common arguments which are sometime seen.
I hope we could also discuss what would be the benefits of a materialistic explanation with respect to a faith explanation (or viceversa of course...)
I am particularly interested in this because I think this discussion is part of a more general discussion about what is knowledge and science which is in my experience where discussions between theists and scientists usually get stuck (eg ID is science ID is not).
First of all I suppose we can agree that
1) abiogenesis actually happened
I mean at some point in the past life emerged from chemicals.
Of course this could have happened by chance, by some other materialistic explanation (including engineered by extra terrestrial civilization) or by divine action.
http://discussions.godandscience.org/vi ... 4269#44269
The aim is to collect and scrutinize different scenarios for abiogenesis in science and faith.
The original discussion was with Byblos while of course others are welcome to add comments.
I think we can start by listing facts that we know and on which we should agree and possible scenarios to be considered.
Then we can compare and discuss different scenarios, just to see if we could agree on something.
This should provide a representation of current knowledge from different point of views.
As I said in the past I personally think we know too few about abiogenesis yet to obtained a universal agreement but at least we should be able to cut down some common arguments which are sometime seen.
I hope we could also discuss what would be the benefits of a materialistic explanation with respect to a faith explanation (or viceversa of course...)
I am particularly interested in this because I think this discussion is part of a more general discussion about what is knowledge and science which is in my experience where discussions between theists and scientists usually get stuck (eg ID is science ID is not).
First of all I suppose we can agree that
1) abiogenesis actually happened
I mean at some point in the past life emerged from chemicals.
Of course this could have happened by chance, by some other materialistic explanation (including engineered by extra terrestrial civilization) or by divine action.