Natural Selection – Hasty Generalization, Slippery Slope, or Wishful Thinking?
|February 19, 2006||Posted by Dave S. under Intelligent Design|
The observed effects of random mutation plus natural selection can account for temporary changes in finch beak size, pigmentation changes in moths, and antibiotic resistance in bacteria. It has never been observed creating novel 1) cell types, 2) tissue types, 3) organs, or 4) body plans. All four of those creative events must be explained by any theory of evolution. In the neoDarwinian theory or modern synthesis these are explained by the never observed accumulation of minor random mutations filtered by natural selection.
Obviously taking the mechanism that changes the size of a finch beak and making it the mechanism that changes a bacterium into a finch is one heck of an extrapolation. However, I’m in a quandry over whether this hideous bit of extrapolation ad absurdum better fits the logical fallacy of hasty generalization (also called leaping to a conclusion) or slippery slope (also called the camel’s nose). Which do you all think is the better fit?
Of course if we’re restricting our critique of Natural Selection to just atheist thought processes then it undeniably becomes the logical fallacy of wishful thinking.