Which is why arguably it is an "incomplete" theory. It tells us nothing about the origin of life or of consciousness; and yet living beings are both alive and in possession of some form of consciousness. Thus living beings are more than just their material or physical basis. Darwinism can't address that "more" in principle.
It is essentially an historical theory. It tells us what it alleges happened to biological species on an historical timeline. Yet this
...historical (or horizontal) perspective ... is only useful insofar as it helps to illuminate a non-historical or "vertical" dimension operating outside chronological time. Both religious and scientific fundamentalists attempt to locate in historical time what can only be found in metaphysical space, and mistakenly regard conventional history as more "real" than the deeper or higher truth from which it is a declension. — Robert Godwin, One Cosmos under God, 2004, p. 200Plato had an interesting suggestion: He said that the soul is the "form" of the body. That is, it preexists (and post-exists) physical incarnation and is that which "describes" and "orders" the physical. He believed that souls are immortal long before Christianity came along to confirm this astounding insight.
You mentioned that you consider the question of "at what point humans got souls" is "above your pay grade." But God freely tells you this — in Genesis 1.
You say that like it's a flaw in the theory. "Incomplete" is just a scarier word for "limited." The ToE is only trying to explain the physical basis of living beings. That it doesn't try to explain consciousness as well doesn't make its explanation of material bodies wrong, any more than the theory of star formation is wrong if it doesn't explain where the clouds of interstellar gas came from in the first place.
“But evolution is all and only about physical considerations”
Spirited: This is true only for dogmatic reductive materialists (physicalists). Darwinism is indispensable to such people because it is the only materialist explanation for the workings of nature that they have. Since they are physicalists, then Darwinism is “all and only about physical considerations.”
Today many spiritual Transhumanists, evolutionary Christians, Cultural Creative’s, New Age Progressives, Integral Spiritualists, Interspiritualists and/or Transtraditional Spiritualists are adherents of Teilhard’s spiritual evolutionary concept.
Teilhard claims that after millions of years of evolution, a natural (immanent) god has finally emerged out of matter. Whereas Christianity dedivinized nature Teilhards’ idea redivinizes it.
Teilhards’ idea is merely a reprisal of the Babylonian evolutionary cosmogony ‘Enuma Elish’ and Egypts’ ‘The Evolutions of Ra...’ These most ancient evolutionary cosmogonies speak of pre-existing matter (watery chaos, abyss, void, Nu) and of a Sun-God, i.e., Ra, evolving out of it over time.
The respected traditionalist metaphysician Rene Guenon (1886-1951) explains the meaning of ‘the evolutions of Ra’ in his brilliant critical analysis of Theosophy and Spiritism entitled, “The Spiritist Fallacy.”
Guenon writes that within early Theosophist and spiritist (mediums/channelers) circles in Christendom use of the word ‘progress’ or ‘progressivist’ preceded the use of the word ‘evolution.’
The roots of Theosophy, hence of evolution, stretch back to the ancient Upanishads of India, to ancient Greece, and at their furthest reach, to Babylonia and Egypt.
In its Darwinian version, evolution describes the progress of life as it inhabits in succession the bodies of different kinds of lifeforms (macroevolution)over the course of millions and even billions of years.
Though Teilhards’ spiritual concept springboards off of Darwins’ idea it is actually a modern retelling of the Babylonian and Egyptian concept which describes the progress (transmigration) of soul as it inhabits in succession the bodies of different beings (macroevolution)over the course of millions and billions of years.
Guenon adds that eventually the word evolution became preferred, especially by empirical realists and materialists like Karl Marx because it had a more ‘scientific’ allure:
“This kind of ‘verbalism’...provides the illusion of thought for those incapable of really thinking...” said Guenon. (ibid, p. 231)
betty to Ha Ha: You mentioned that you consider the question of “at what point humans got souls” is “above your pay grade.” But God freely tells you this — in Genesis 1.
Spirited: Now either Teilhard’s idea is responsible for your soul or the supernatural Triune God is. If the former you are made in the image of nothing. If the latter you are a tripartite being, the spiritual image-bearer of the Triune God.