Introduction:
Science is so popular
and acceptable to modern people, for this reason scientific theory are more
acceptable than religious doctrine. The creation of this universe is mysterious
for humanity, because there is no exact prove how the universe came into being.
In this case Science and religion has own opinion and they are contradict to
each other. The most familiar scientific theory big bang talk about the
beginning of universe and the evolution theory of Charles Darwin’s discuss
about the process of origin of living being specially human came into being.
How the human have reached in this stage. According to them humanity came by
accidently or through evolution not created by any supreme being. The
biological mechanism of human body is most complex in design and it is free
from error. The formation of living being is still mysterious for humanity and
thought that there should be a brilliant designer who had designed neatly. But
now scientists are trying to manipulate God’s creation by modifying God’s
design. And ethical questions are arises.
What is Intelligent Design :
This is another theory
of the origin of the universe that negates the validity of Darwin’s
evolution theory. Intelligent design is a belief or theory that the complex
structures of life cannot be explained by natural selection and random mutation
as suggested by Darwin but must be explained by some forces of willful design.
According to intelligent design proponents, the inner workings of the cell and
the complexity of the eye, etc. are so intricate that they require a creative
intelligent force to have set them in motion. This theory holds that living
things show signs of having been designed, and that living creatures and their
biological systems are too complex to be accounted for by the Darwinian theory
of evolution, and that a designer or a higher intelligence may be responsible
for their complexity.[1]
The theory of
intelligent design posits that some features of the universe and living things
are best explained by intelligent causes rather than an undirected process such
as natural selection.[2]
The emergence of Intelligent
design:
Intelligent design
theory was based on William Paley’s work Natural Theology published in 1802 of
which Darwin was very familiar, Paley argued that the intricate and delicate
structures and workings of the watch show that it has been designed by a
creative and intelligent watchmaker; since the universe resembles a watch in
its organization there must be cosmic designer. In other words, just as we
infer a watchmaker from the complex working s of a pocket watch, we must infer
a creator of the universe from the complex systems of the natural order.
The concept of intelligent design was
quite old. Aristotle’s ‘inclusion of the final cause’ in his analysis of the
physical and biological worlds, and the Stoics’ inference of the existence of
God from biological complexity point for the early existence of arguments
regarding purpose and design. However, the present intelligent design theory
was developed by a group of American creationists who protested the court
ruling which barred the teaching of ‘creation science’ in public schools as
breaching the separation of church and state. The intelligent design only goes
back to 1988, when it was first used by Charles Thaxton in a speech, and later
in the textbook he edited, of ‘Pandas and People: The central
Question of Biological Origins’. Many consider Phillip Johnson the real founder
of the modern intelligent design movement. Since the mid-1990s, intelligent
design advocates have been supported by the Discovery Institute, which plans
and funds the "intelligent design movement" together with the Center
for Science and Culture. They advocated for the inclusion of intelligent design
in public school curricula.[3]
Hume’s Analogy on
Intelligent Design:
First, we now
know that organisms come from organisms, because organisms possess
information-rich macromolecules and a complex information- rich system for
processing and replication the information stored in those molecules. Data-rich
systems emerge from existing data systems through replication mechanisms, or
data-rich systems emerge from consciousness. However, -- systems capable of
copying and processing other information ultimately arise from intelligent
design. After all, computer hardware that can transfer and process data in
software originates in the minds of engineers. The question now is whether life
arises only from undirected material processes or whether consciousness also
plays a role. Since we know that reproductive organisms form information-rich
systems, Hume's appeal to synchronicity suggests intelligent design, an
undirected process, as an explanation for the origin of early life.[4]
Second, although many interesting
analogies exist between living organisms and human information technology, the
contemporary case for intelligent design is not a communist argument. If, as
Bill Gates says, "DNA is like a computer program," then it makes
sense to assume, on hypothetical grounds, that DNA also has an intelligent
source. Although the information digitally encoded in DNA is similar to the
information in a computer program, the case for design made here does not rely
solely on similarity.[5]
Manipulation of Intelligent
Design:
The feeling is to defy
the genes in some way, to reach the place that makes us human. Different genes;
some even call it sacred. For some, the future of the human race is at stake;
people are being so radically altered that we are losing the idea of what it
means to be human. It may even be that in a few years time humans will be
unrecognisable compared to what they are now. The uncertainty that is implicit
within genetic mechanisms and that lies at the core of normal human
reproduction is regarded as being central to the maintenance of human dignity, partly,
perhaps, where God's influence reigns supreme.[6]
Genetic
Engineering:
By definition, genetic
engineering is the direct modification of an organism's genome by manipulating
its DNA. This is achieved through 'recombinant DNA technology', which includes
various techniques for inserting, changing or cutting DNA fragments containing
one or more genes of interest. This is also known as genetic modification, gene
transfer or transgenesis.[7] Genetic Engineering
additionally called genetic modification or genetic manipulation is the
immediate control of a living being's genes using biotechnology. It is an
arrangement of innovations used to change the hereditary forms of cells,
including the exchange of qualities inside and across species limits to create
enhanced or novel living beings.[8]
Human cloning:
Human
cloning generally refers to the reproductive cloning of humans to create genetic
copies of existing humans. Despite decades of speculation, there has been no
human reproductive cloning.[9] The idea of cloning of living organism came into being by cloning
a sheep named Dolly. Dolly was produced by taking a cell from the udder of an
adult sheep and fusing it with an egg that had had its nucleus removed. The
birth of Dolly demonstrated that a cell that previously had limited functions
could be reprogrammed to form an entirely new animal, just as if it was a
fertilised egg. This overturned a fundamental scientific dogma, that it is
biologically impossible to clone mammals. The trouble is this makes it very difficult
to undertake serious debate on the many important features of the biological
phenomenon of cloning, features that have nothing to do with producing real
live human clones.[10] Many scientist has claimed that they had do human cloning
though it is not true, but however, claims of this nature, no matter how
dubious and even fraudulent they are, raise the ethical temperature, by giving
the impression that it is only time before a cloned human will be born. If not
today, it will be tomorrow; if not this year, it will be next year. This makes
wonderful media fodder, stamping cloning with an even more dubious status, but
none of this helps serious ethical analysis. The response of just about every
official political and scientific body throughout the world has been startling.
It is perhaps the only issue on which they all agree: reproductive cloning
should be banned.[11] At one level the situations elicit our sympathy, but the
cost of addressing them replacement child, that is the cloned child, would
never be the same as the one lost. The parents would not be getting back the
child they had lost, simply because the cloned child would be as truly unique
as any other child.[12]
Playing God with
Many moral (if not aesthetic or
religious) issues have come to our attention, such as whether or not we have
large animal clones.
Will cloning be used for the most
marketable cows to increase the amount of meat for animals and make them less
reputable than their benefits for human consumption?
Donald Bruce, Director of Society,
Religion and Scientific Research at the Church of Scotland, said in a press
release dated February 2, 1997 that human cloning is not morally necessary in
principle. He said that according to Christian belief, cloning would violate
the symbol of human life that God gave to all of us and not to anyone else. The
argument that each person has a unique identity and that cloning will destroy
this identity is repeated many times in religion and belief.
No reputable theological position has
ever held that twins share a single soul. Everyone has their own soul and
relationship with God. Theologically speaking, the human soul is not made of
DNA, but the phenotype is made of genotype. The soul is not a metaphysical
extension of the physical world. To Time magazine's question, "Does the
soul return to zero?" We will answer: no.
Or perhaps we can answer: The result, if
any, is not one but two souls.
The key to understanding the theological
soul is not that it appears beyond the body, like the heart or mind. Rather, it
is about understanding the spirit of our relationship with God. The
relationship between man and God is the word of our relationship with God.
Man's relationship with God is not determined by DNA. It is determined by God’s
active grace, by God’s desire to love us as we are.
No sound theological argument against
cloning could be raised on the ground that it violates an alleged God-given
identity. Our identities in society come from growing up in a society. Our
identity before God comes from God's continued grace and our desire or lack of
it to have a relationship with God. Souls do not come in any final form with
ours DNA.[13]
Theological response: Christian frequently look to theological ethics. This is ethical
analysis within a specifically Christian context. The aim here is to emerge
with theological principles that help to address contemporary ethical issues,
with biblical and theological drivers as the main thrust.[14]
A further approach is that of virtue
ethics, with its emphasi9s upon how we are to act practice . When
confronted by bioethical dilemmas of staggering proportions, how do ordinary
people act? After all, it is ordinary people who bear the brunt of decision
–making, since invariably it is their families who are affected and will have
to live with the consequences of their decision-making. This is where virtue ethics
have a part to play , with their stress on the importance of personal
character. Virtues such as kindness, generosity, respect for others, honesty,
and compassion constitute the model of marl conduct. Virtue ethics sit
comfortably alongside many Christian aspirations. They allow Christians to find
those of like mind so that together they can tackle difficult and perplexing
bioethical dilemmas.[15]
Humans are created in the image and
likeness of God.. As God looks on people, he recognises that they are icons
(images) of him. In people God finds his own perfections and characteristics
mirrored back to himself. Consequently, when we see another human being we see
another creature ,who delights God by mirroring him. In the same way we also
mirror each other.[16]
Conclusion: The Bridge between science and theology, observes, intelligent
design is three things; a scientific research program that investigates the
effects of intelligent causes; an intellectual movement that challenges
Darwinism and its naturalistic legacy; and a way of understanding divine
action.” Supporters of intelligent design argue that many features of the be
explained by naturalistic causes and, thus, can only be explained as products
of an intelligent designer. The degree of scientific control is forbidding, and
human beings are thought to be becoming far too efficient in their manipulatory
abilities, since they are leaving far too little to chance or to God. This is
design, and humans should not be in the design business. God has provided
knowledge of science and technology for the welfare of human. But when human
start misuse that knowledge and try to take place of God, the destruction will
come upon to humanity. Human should not live without humanity. We
can have genetic control or God’s control, but not both. Which do we choose: to
be a slave to secular science or faithful follower of Christ?
Bibliography:
C.
Meyer, Stephen. Signature in the Cell:
DNA and the Evidence for Intelligent Design. New York: An Imprint of Harper
Collins Publishers, 2009.
Jones,
Gareth Bioethics: When the Challenges of
Life Become Too Difficult. Hindmarsh: ATF Press, 2007.
Kothari, Ramesh. Application
of Genetic Engineering. Delhi : Indian Institute of Technology, 2010.
Peters,
Ted. Playing God? Genetic
Determinism and Human Freedom. London: Routledge, 2003.
Ralte,
Rodinmawia. The Interface of Science and
religion, an Introductory Study. New Delhi: Christian World Imprints, 2017.
Webliography
Luskin,
Casey. ‘What is intelligent design?, Discovery https://intelligentdesign.org/whatisid/ accessed on 24
March 2021.
Collins,
Nick. Human cloning, https://www.geneticsandsociety.org/topics/human-cloning
accessed on 3:30 pm March 24, 2021.
What is genetic
engineering?,
Shiksha, https://www.shiksha.com/engineering/genetic-engineering-chp
accessed on 5:00 March 24, 2021.
[1] Rodinmawia Ralte, The Interface of Science and religion, An
Introductory Study (New Delhi: Christian World Imprints, 2017), 65.
[2] Casey Luskin, ‘what is intelligent design?, https://intelligentdesign.org/whatisid/
accessed on 24 March 2021.
[3] Rodinmawia Ralte, The Interface of Science and religion: An
Introductory Study (New Delhi:
Christian World Imprints, 2017), 65-66.
[4] Stephen C. Meyer, Signature in the Cell: DNA and the
Evidence for Intelligent Design (New York: An Imprint of Harper Collins
Publishers, 2009), 384. Hereafter referred as C. Meyer, Signature in the Cell: DNA
and the Evidence …
[5] Stephen C. Meyer, Signature in the Cell: DNA and the Evidence …, 385.
[6] Gareth Jones, Bioethics: When the Challenges of Life
Become Too Difficult (Hindmarsh: ATF Press, 2007), 157. Hereafter referred
as Jones, Bioethics: when the…
[7] Ramesh Kothari, Application of Genetic Engineering
(Delhi: Indian Institute of Technology, 2010), 5.
[8]
What is genetic engineering?,
Shiksha, https://www.shiksha.com/engineering/genetic-engineering-chpaccessed
on 5:00 March 24, 2021.
[9] Nick Collins, Human cloning, Center for Genetics and Society, https://www.geneticsandsociety.org/topics/human-cloning
accessed on 3:30 pm March 24, 2021.
[10] Jones, Bioethics: When the…, 122-123.
[11] Jones, Bioethics: When the…,124.
[12] Jones, Bioethics: When the…, 126.
[13]Ted Peters, PlayingGod? GeneticDeterminismandHumanFreedom(London:
Routledge, 2003), 162-163.
[14] Jones, Bioethics: When the…,232.
[15] Jones, Bioethics: When the …,233.
[16] Jones, Bioethics: When the…,17-18.
0 Comments