Science And Religion In Edward O. Wilson's Intelligent Evolution

Edward O. Wilson, in his essay Intelligent Evolution, diagnoses the gap between science and religion as “tectonic” (556), and predicts its continuous expansion. Obviously, the widest chasm appears in the field of biology: evolution versus creation. Evolutionary science sees life as a consequence of blind chances, while Abrahamic religion views life as a creation of God. After all, is it possible for evolution or creation to become the “correct” explanation, prevailing over the other? Wilson claims that evolution is the correct one, but I believe that there is no better or worse answer. Each authority is built on the different ground: either proof or faith. Hence, there is no common criteria to weigh them side by side and simply choose the answer.

The authority of the theory of evolution can be characterized by defining what qualifies as a scientific theory. Although there are several perspectives regarding what science is, they are based on the same premises. Karl Popper, a philosopher of science, claims that the process of “conjectures and refutations” is the method of science (46). In this process, a

“Each subject has a legitimate magisterium, or domain of teaching authority—and these magisteria do not overlap” (19), writes Stephen Jay Gould in Non-Overlapping Magisteria. Accordingly, the efforts to persuade the other side are both futile. Fear aroused from such futility often leads to vigorous resistance to the other. Wilson denounces the “toxic” nature of religion and proposes scientific humanism as “the effective antidote, the light and the way at last placed before us” (556). Wilson sees scientific humanism as “the only worldview” compatible with the real world, and refuses rapprochement, which is “neither possible nor desirable” (556). However, I believe that rapprochement can be achieved when science and religion understand their