Contemplating Contradiction

My first graded PHIL 150 Paper. Hold on to your seats, I'm delving into world where science and religion combine without relenting.

Peter Winch’s chapter “Darwin, Genesis and Contradiction” from his book Trying to Make Sense contains a number of insights useful in understanding conflicts between ideas, yet essentially fails to offer an actual strategy in resolving these differences, instead leaving it up to individuals to make their own decisions concerning such a matter.  The chapter succeeds in that it helps readers to think objectively about ideas from differing contexts, such as the well known story of Genesis and theories of Darwin.  However, it does not advocate a solution that can be accepted and applied by any reader to be at peace with the hidden contradiction.

Winch believes that an understanding of language games, a concept discussed by Ludwig Wittgenstein, helps in the analysis of hidden contradictions.  Language games are essentially different backgrounds or contexts in which ideas are developed.  As such, ideas are best understood by people familiar with its particular language game, or at least one that is very similar.  Because the account of Genesis and Darwin’s theories are from radically different language games, they cannot be compared to the point that allows one to make a decision about which one may be “true,” therefore discrediting the other.  In this sense Winch is correct, as for one idea to be right and another wrong, they have to be in agreement to the same set of rules, wording, and vocabulary.  This is the case with Genesis and Darwin, as neither idea presented could be understood by the author of the other.  Both explanations simply fill the need for man to know how he came to be without explicitly contradicting the other.

Problems arise when a reader tries to arrive at the final destination of Winch’s argument.  The closest Winch comes to resolving the conflict between Darwin and Genesis is his assertion that there are not contradictions between the two, but differences.  He encourages the reader to make discoveries about him or herself which will lead to further “examination of what seem to be deep contradictions in one’s thought.”1  This does not give the reader any advantage that he or she did not have before reading that would help to reach a conclusion on the matter.  Instead the reader is expected to accept that contradictions do not and cannot exist, as Winch implies with that statement, and somehow find a satisfying conclusion.  By stating that contradictions do not exist, Winch supports that there is no problem to be solved or that should need a conclusion in the first place, as both ideas are from different language games.  However, many of the readers understand and have been raised with a knowledge of both language games, leaving them to feel as if they need to make a decision about which idea is right.  With the understanding of both language games, one should realize that because they don’t explicitly contradict each other, and because the absolute truth of the situation is unknown, both ideas could be fragments of the same actual truth sought by all.

In academics, a subject is understood best when studied from various angles of learning.  Economics blends with statistics and politics, chemistry involves physics and biology, and philosophy relies on English.  When studying in this way, marvelous realizations occur and understanding about comparable situations in different fields are imminent.  In pursuit of the whole truth about a phenomenon or idea, more than one area of analysis is required.  In the case of Genesis and Darwin, both shed light on different aspects of the entire truth concerning the creation of man.  Because they do not explicitly contradict, they add to each other, revealing much more together than they could alone.  With no evidence to the contrary, it is safe to assume that, in concurrence with both ideas discussed in Winch’s chapter, God created the earth using the laws of science.

A reading of Winch’s work will certainly enlighten one’s understanding of language games and the comparing of ideas from different contexts.  However, he fails to provide a satisfying conclusion on how to deal with the hidden contradiction between Darwin and Genesis.  This gap can be successfully filled with the concept that both ideas can uncover portions of the same one truth which is sought by members of different language games.

¹ Winch, Peter. "Darwin, Genesis, and Contradiction." Trying to Make Sense. Oxford, OX, UK: B. Blackwell, 1987. 138-39. Print.

Author's Note

So, I got an A, but that doesn't mean it's perfect. Tell me what you think.