Page 227 - Flipping book The Adam Paradox Hypothesis - Second Edition.pdf

The Ādam Paradox Hypothesis 204
4. A Philosophy of Dialogue
Philosophers of science like Karl Popper insisted that science progresses
through bold conjectures that risk refutation. Thomas Kuhn argued that
paradigms shape what scientists even see as evidence. In this sense, revelation
functions like a paradigm: it orients what questions are worth asking.
To say the Qur
ʾān speaks of clay, names, spirit, and trust is not to collapse
science into scripture. It is to recognize that revelation identifies the same
thresholds that science later discovers, and offers an interpretive compass that
protects against both reductionism and nihilism.
Closing Reflection
To read the beacons carefully is to recognize their double gift. They are simple
enough for the unlettered: clay, names, spirit, trust. Yet profound enough to
orient genomic scans, archaeological digs, and demographic models. They do
not dictate the data; they illuminate its meaning.
APH thus treats revelation the way science has always treated metaphors: as
wagers on where the decisive truth will lie. Darwin staked his metaphor on
fossils; Einstein staked his on starlight. APH stakes its beacons on the
synchrony of genomes, artifacts, and responsibility. And so far, the evidence
suggests the beacons have pointed exactly where they should.