Why evolution by 'random chance' can't exist without the supernatural

Great Debates
1

The notion of evolution by “random chance” actually refutes atheistic materialism, and I’ll easily explain why:

If nothing but the physical universe exists, and therefore in essence the universe is one giant machine, then true “randomness” is nonexistent. Because in order for something to be truly “random”, it would need to be able to ‘just happen magically’ without any prior cause or effect.

Machines of course, are not truly random. A slot machine for example may appear to be ‘random’ to a person playing it at a casino since the person can’t predict what numbers will appear, but in reality of course, the numbers which appear when a person plays the slot machine follow a pre-determined algorithm programmed into the machine.

If the material world is all that exists, then this would in effect make it one giant perpetual motion machine, therefore of course nothing including evolution is actually “random”, it all happened pre-determinedly by cause and effect, like a line of dominos.

On the other hand if the Big Bang and evolution did occur by “random chance”, this would of course require a supernatural entity with the ‘free will’ to make things happen spontaneously without any prior cause, contradicting the laws of physics.

It could only be therefore possible if either a theistic creator randomly chose to create the universe, or if a deistic creator set it all into motion, but gave humans and animals the free will to ‘randomly’ decide their mating partners.

Since of course, under a pure physics model, the animal mate selection that led to the evolution of humans was not ‘random’, but was of course just a pre-determined outcome of the universe ‘machine’ going through its motions. Nor the weather, climate shifts, cataclysms such as the death of the dinosaurs.

While if the evolution of humans was ‘random’, this would mean that animals and humans had the free will to choose their mating partners independently of any external stimuli - which would mean humans potentially may not have existed if animal predecessors, had made different choices, but would still require the existence of a deistic supernatural entity which allows them to make random choices independent of the laws of physics, even if this deistic creator simply set everything into motion and left it to its own devices, without any plan of its own for humans to exist or not exist.

In summary, there are only two logically correct options here:

  1. That nothing exists other than the physical universe, but nevertheless that everything has been pre-determined to happen by cause and effect, and that ‘randomness’ therefore does not exist as it would contradict the laws of physics.

  2. That evolution occurred randomly, but a supernatural entity gave humans and animals the free will to choose their mating partners randomly without any prior cause and effect, despite this being impossible under the laws of physics. Since if one believes that anything can just ‘randomly’ happen without any prior physical cause, this means they believe things can happen supernaturally, or by ‘magic’ if you will.

2

False.

3
  1. You are taking the term “random” too literally. In evolutionary terms, it just means it happens in a fashion not controlled by the individual. We hoo-mans, however, can now consciously change our genes and evolve in a different way-- NOT thru “natural selection”.

Theoretically, evolution could be happening in a way completely predictable by the initial conditions right after the BB. The BB, of course, did not have a cause, in the usual sense of that term (as far was we know).

4

You lost me on that quick turn there. You are begging the question- your supposition that “randomness” somehow REQUIRES a supernatural entity, with free will, is not presented (logically or otherwise). Let’s start there.

5

What happened to your similar post on morality?

But we know there are things that happen randomly, without any prior cause. The rest of your post kind of falls apart after that.

6

Not at all, if things happen by physical cause and effect, then they aren’t truly “random”.

While playing poker is said to involve ‘luck’ for example, in reality the outcome is entirely pre-determined by the cards which are dealt.

If you believe things happen at ‘random’, then this means you think things just happen by magic without any prior physical cause; much as how today we know that while we don’t have an accurate way of predicting the weather yet, eventually we could trace it back to a naturally occurring physical cause.

As opposed to say, the ancient Greeks who believed the weather was completely random and that thunderstorms occurred whenever Zeus had a temper tantrum.

7

Same old garbage.

Yes, evolution works in part by random variations. It also works by weeding out those variations that don’t have a survival advantage.

Focusing only on half the mechanism is to completely miss the point. As with so many, many, MANY creationists we’ve seen over the years, this OP fails to take into account the actual way evolution works.

(Also false dichotomy.)

(Also, the Big Bang has absolutely nothing to do with evolution. Conflating the two is as silly as wondering about the effect of gravitational waves on the algae in my fish-tank. Bugger all nothing.)

8

The argument falls apart right at the beginning, here:

The argument is dependent on a definition of “random” as “without any prior cause.” That is not the meaning of “random.” Some definitions:

I believe you will find it difficult to find a generally-accepted definition of “random” that relies upon ‘the lack of existence of a prior cause’.

9

So you know that magic exists? Well if it’s true I’d like to see it.

And that’s actually untrue, while there are things which exist which we aren’t yet able to trace the cause, such as concepts in quantum physics. We of course believe that if the laws of physics hold true, that eventually we’d be able to trace them to a predictable cause and effect, even if we can’t now.

People in ancient Greek times for example believed that weather was random and unpredictable, so they attributed it to the temperament of gods, but modern physics has debunked this and shown that weather and climate relate to natural cycles within the physical world.

If you believe the original cause is absolute randomness, then that means you believe in the supernatural, since it would contradict the laws of physics. And if you believe that, there’s no reason not to believe that someone can just snap their fingers and turn water into wine either.

10

In a purely deterministic universe with nothing truly random. You’d be correct.

11

TLDR version: Any event which is random has a cause. Being random has nothing to do with having or not having a cause.

What ‘being random’ has to do with (instead) is happening due to something other than a plan or pattern. But unplanned events do have causes.

12

Quantum theory states that 2 (or multiple) states can coexist until, among other things, looked at by intelligent life, at which ‘time’ only one of those states exists.

So yes the universe is random, unless guided by intelligence, at which time it is guided. However such observations of quantum states have been able to be achieved and demonstrated by the lowliness of mankind, so does not require an all mighty God.

13

True, but according to physics everything is a part of a system, even if it appears to be unsystematic.

For example, just because people in ancient Greece didn’t know the orbit of the moon had a physical cause, and attributed it to gods or goddesses, doesn’t mean it wasn’t later discovered to have one.

So this would mean that in the physics model, that technically nothing is truly ‘unsystematic’ - there might be things whose cause we haven’t discovered yet, but eventually will. So ‘random’ is more of just an emotional statement than a scientific one; silly example but if I walked down the street and was nearly hit by a drunk driver, then it might have seemed to have happened at random, but obviously it wasn’t literally so, it could be traced back to prior physical cause and effect.

14

Regarding “randomness” and evolution specifically, the randomness is a function of the outcome of many independent events coinciding to cause selection pressures that are not being directed in any way.

Take the perennial favorite example of selective pressure, the peppered moth. Under normal circumstances, in the environment it lived in, its speckled appearance gave it some measure of protection against predation, as it was camouflaged when resting on the lichen-covered trees in the area. A random (if somewhat common) genetic mutation caused some moths to be hypermelanic, much darker in color than the standard moths of the area, and they stood out when at rest on the much lighter-colored trees, and usually were eaten in short order. During the industrial revolution, however, the pollution from coal-burning began to change the nature of the trees, and also left a sooty coating on most surfaces around the towns and cities. Suddenly, the dark color of the hypermelanic moths was a benefit, and not a hindrance, so the population increased- the light-colored “normal” moths were now being selected against through predation.

Because of a random confluence of events, selective pressure changed, and over a long enough time period, that change would likely result in speciation. That is what is meant by randomness in evolution. While many of those outcomes may not in themselves seem random (coal-burning leading to pollution, air heavy with coal soot leading to dirty surfaces around coal-burning areas, dark colored moths hiding better against a dark-colored surface), their independence does allow the drunkard’s walk that is evolution to continue on its meandering path.

15

Intelligent life has nothing to do with quantum effects resolving.

16

At this point you are trying to conflate the word “random” with the word “magic”. I assure you, those two words have vastly different definitions.

17

But the point is, the mutation didn’t happen by pure randomness or ‘magic’, it happened due to prior physical cause and effects.

If the evolution of the moths was a train moving north, and the mutation was a car moving east, then the mutation occurred when the car moving east fender-bendered the train moving north.

But of course the car didn’t just appear out of the blue by randomness or ‘magic’, it was being directed on its course by a separate pre-determined set of events which intersected.

Okay, but ‘random’ under this definition doesn’t mean literally unpredictable or without prior cause.

Basically it’s just one set of cause and effects ‘colliding’ with another set of cause and effects.

Such as a robotic arm on an assembly line interacting with automobile parts on a conveyer belt, in this analogy the line of parts on the conveyer belt is the evolutionary process, while the robotic arm is the ‘mutation’.

18

I specified “random” being used in the sense of being able to happen with no prior physical cause.

If by random you simply mean 'unpredictable, then that’s different, but under the laws of physics everything will eventually have a predictable cause and effect, even if scientists don’t have one currently. While scientists can’t predict what processed the Big Bang yet for example, that doesn’t mean that under the laws of physics it just happened with no prior cause, just that future technology will be needed to further trace the cause.

But if you believe something can happen in the physical universe which literally has no prior physical cause, then that is definitely the same as believing in magic, or that a supernatural being just willed it into existence from nothing.

19

What “randomness” means in evolution is unpredictable and without direction. It is a cosmic ray or DNA-damaging molecule or mistake in copying effecting nucleotide x instead of nucleotide x+1 or x-1.

20

Again the problem is a confusion between “random” and “without a cause.” Random does not mean “without a cause.” I would urge you to try to find a reputable dictionary that defines “random” the way you want to–you won’t be able to do so.

If you are walking down the street and are nearly hit by a drunk driver, the event is “random” if the driver did not plan or intend to hit you. (We shall assume that the hypothetical driver is not a reader of this thread.)

Saying the event is “random” is nothing to do with making a claim that there is a cause for the event. (Of course there are causes for the event–the speed of the vehicle, the nearness of the vehicle to you, the impaired reflexes of the drunk driver, and so on.)