Theoretical origin of life: more ruminations (Introduction)

by dhw, Friday, December 18, 2015, 20:01 (3263 days ago) @ David Turell

dhw: They interpreted this as an attack on religion itself, which it was never meant to be. Hence the additions and the explicit reassurances that he was NOT attacking religion. Why else would he have made such insertions and statements? His theory IS compatible with religious belief. That is why I rail against those from both sides of the fence who deliberately distort the theory to serve their own agenda. Maybe his private writings would tell us more, but I don't have time to delve.-DAVID: Every side misuses him. I believe his private writings, letters, etc., indicate he was pretty much agnostic. However all sides must accept that origin and evolution are inextricably linked together. One cannot be explained without the other.-I can accept common descent without knowing the origin (as could Darwin), but I agree that we cannot explain how it happened without understanding the original mechanism that allowed for life, reproduction, adaptation and innovation. But even if all the codes were finally cracked, I doubt whether there would be consensus as to how it got there in the first place. Thank you for acknowledging the universal misuse of Darwin. I'm sure you will now pounce on it whenever theists or atheists indulge in such distortions, but if you don't, I shall! As for Darwin's position, I have previously quoted statements from his writings which establish that he was an agnostic.