I eit katolsk diskusjonsforum kom det for ei tid tilbake eit argument imot evolusjonsteorien frå naturlova. Eg er usikker korleis eg skal svare på dette. Eg kjenner på meg at det er noko som er feil med dette argumentet (og det kan like godt brukast som eit evolusjonært argument imot naturlova.) Ein kan ikkje bruke forumet (inkludert lese i det) utan å vere medlem der, grunna mykje spam. Korleis skulle eg svart på dette?
Her er ein link til argumentet. Og her er argumentet:
An Argument from Natural LawAn argument from natural law and dominion that disproves evolution.
“By Thy wisdom Thou hast appointed man, that he should have dominion over the creature that was made by Thee” (Wisdom 9:2)
“Honor your father and your mother, so that your days may be long in the land that the Lord your God is giving you.” (Exodus 20:12)
“Dominion” means to have authority over something. It is part of the natural law that children should be obedient and submissive to the authority of their parents for they have dominion over them. But if God, in the course of the evolutionary process, infused a rational soul into the form of a non-human animal, then the offspring would not be obliged to submit to it’s parents, on the contrary, according to Scripture, the child would instead have dominion and authority over the parents. It is absurd to say that an irrational animal can have dominion or authority over a rational animal. Consequently, it must be said that the evolutionary theory is in direct violation of the natural law.
Put in syllogistic form:
God gave man dominion over all creatures of the earth.
It is part of the natural and divine positive law to be obedient to authority.
As such, offspring are obligated to submit to parental authority, as this pertains to the order of reason.
But if man came from an irrational creature, he would not have dominion over all creatures of the earth. On the contrary, he would be obliged to submit to the authority of an irrational creature, one who has no use of reason. But Scripture clearly states that man has always had dominion over irrational creatures, precisely because of his rational intellective powers.
Therefore, man could not have descended from irrational creatures, for this would involve a contradiction with the natural law.
Therefore, evolution posits an absurd and immoral anthropology.
A corollary would be the problem of language, culture and religion. The Christian evolutionist must explain how these ideas would have been passed down by irrational creatures.
I invite any evolutionists to refute this argument.