Posted on 09/18/2007 10:23:38 AM PDT by spirited irish
The worldview of Evolutionary Humanism (or scientific naturalism) has two central components. The first is metaphysical; the second epistemological. Metaphysically, Evolutionary Humanism infers that the natural or material realm either self-created or has existed eternally. This doctrine is known as scientism. In addition, this worldview teaches us to believe that everything---including life and intelligence---came about through unseen (immaterial) processes of motion called evolution. Epistemologically, it demands that sensory knowledge (empiricism) be the only authoritative source of knowledge.
In the words of the Humanist Manifesto II: “Knowledge of the world is derived by observation, experimentation, and rational analysis…science is the best method for determining this knowledge…” This principle is a universal limitation on knowledge requiring that knowledge be restricted to only that which can be empirically determined (sensed). In short, if it can’t be touched, seen under a microscope, measured, counted, weighed, or otherwise sensed, then it doesn’t exist, meaning that the immaterial or metaphysical realm does not exist.
This worldview’s two-part metaphysical creation story revolves around the atomic theory of matter and evolutionary theory. According to the former, all chemical change is the result of the rearrangement of unseen (immaterial) tiny parts---protons, neutrons, and electrons. By authority of the latter (evolutionary theory), we are expected to believe that random mutations or incremental changes (rearrangement of tiny unseen parts) over time are mostly responsible for causing macro-changes. In other words, this unseen process of change miraculously caused bacteria to change into fish which in turn changed into lizards which then changed into proto-apes which then changed into man. Through this same process, dinosaurs changed into hummingbirds, chickadees, flamingos, and such. Because all life forms emerged out of the same primordial bacterial stew, bacteria are the common ancestors of all life forms. By extension, all life forms share the same genetic material; therefore the idea of species distinctions is a fiction. This makes man a Heinz 57 mutt whose material brain possesses genetic material from bacteria, lizards, fish, and apes. In the words of John Darnton in the San Francisco Chronicle in 2005:
“We are all of us, dogs and barnacles, pigeons and crabgrass…equally remarkable and equally dispensable.” (Quote from, “Human Beings Deserve the Right to Life Because They Are Human,” Wesley J. Smith, Life News, 8/27/07)
With profound faith in the humanist worldview, evolutionists and fellow travelers view themselves as thoroughly ‘modern’ ‘progressive’ and ‘intellectually enlightened.’ From their lofty perches they look down their noses in utter contempt and disdain upon the unwashed masses (defenders of God and America’s founding Judao-Christian worldview) for continuing to believe the unenlightened view that man is created in God’s image rather than accepting the ‘enlightened’ superstition that mans’ common ancestor is mindless bacteria. Believing they have arisen to spectacular intellectual heights, in reality the so-called ‘enlightened ones’ have fallen into the abyss of the most absurdly stupid and dangerously delusional belief system the world has yet witnessed. How can this be? Briefly, the entirety of their worldview (including its evolutionary creation story) is not itself scientifically testable. By failing to meet its own empirical requirements, it refutes itself. Yes, here we come to now understand why the emperor has no clothes.
This embarrassingly insurmountable intellectual problem occurs precisely because of humanism’s anti-God and metaphysical bias. Rejecting God and metaphysics is destructive of reason and science. In short, it’s not just anti-intellectual it’s also an insanity inducing deception.
Metaphysics
The word metaphysics is based on the compound of two Greek words meta (after, beyond) and physika (physics, nature). It literally means beyond the physical or knowledge that exists beyond the physical world of sensory perception. Metaphysics is the study of the ultimate nature of reality, that is to say, it encompasses both natural and supernatural realms in its investigation of the origin, structure, and nature of what is real.
Greg L. Bahnsen tells us that worldviews are networks of metaphysical presuppositions and principles “regarding reality (metaphysics), knowing (epistemology), and conduct (ethics) in terms of which every element of human experience is related and interpreted.”(Pushing the Antithesis, p. 280)
Presuppositions provide both foundation and framework for worldviews. Crucial to the process of reason, presuppositions provide starting points and standards of authority by which truth and error are evaluated, the real and unreal can be identified, and the possible and impossible are determined. For instance, “In the beginning, Nothing---then a spark--- then Matter…” (spontaneous generation or something from nothing) is the foundational metaphysical presupposition by which evolutionary humanists determined through a peculiar reasoning process that only the sensory realm exists.
Universals are truths of an immaterial or non-sensory nature and are crucial to the understanding, organizing, and interpreting of particular truths within the context of the material world. Universals are metaphysical constructs such as concepts (i.e., inalienable rights), standards, principles (i.e., our founding principles), moral values, laws, and categorical statements. The Laws of Logic, so vitally important to the practice of science, reason, and coherent communication, are universals.
Metaphysical presuppositions and universals can’t be seen under a microscope, held in the hand, measured, weighed, or otherwise detected by the five senses yet they do exist. They exist within the supernatural or immaterial realm and are absolutely essential to the process of reason and the practice of science.
Additionally, scientists constantly deal with the unseen or immaterial realm in the form of subatomic particles, gravity, numbers, natural laws, laws of thought, causation, and memory (vital to scientific experimentation).
The whole theory of evolution, which drives and authenticates modern materialist presuppositions and assumptions, is a non-sensory (metaphysical) theoretical projection back into time. Yet despite that no scientist was there to witness it nor has anyone ever observed the creation of other universes or witnessed one kind of life change into a different kind, the theory of evolution is nevertheless proclaimed by many to be an empirically determined fact.
In principle, evolutionary humanists cannot even count, weigh, or measure (all of which are essential to the practice of science) because these acts involve an immaterial concept of law (a universal). Additionally, the postulation of universal order, a view necessary to making counting, weighing, and measuring intelligible, contradicts the materialist (metaphysical) proposition that the universe is a random or chance material realm. Furthermore, counting, weighing, and measuring call for immaterial entities which are uniform, orderly, and predictable. This once again contradicts the materialist proposition of continuous and random change over time.
Within the anti-intellectual straitjacket of the sensory realm, reason and science are destroyed. Empirical learning, reason, and intellectual inquiry are impossible without metaphysical presuppositions, universals, and assumptions.
As it is, evolutionary humanists do in fact reason, theorize, propose, presuppose, assume, hypothesize, count, weigh, measure, and practice science. They simply cannot give a philosophically principled account of how they “know” to do these things. All of which highlights the glaring dialectical tensions (i.e., hypocrisy, revisionism, deceptions, self-delusions, outright lying, mysticism) which of necessity are endemic to the humanist worldview.
Yet despite its colossal intellectual and moral failings, Evolutionary Humanism is now the dominant worldview in our secularized schools, colleges, universities, and government at every level. Additionally, it has made inroads into Christian schools, seminaries, and churches.
Regarding education in America, its’ direction can be seen as a downward spiral from Jonathan Edwards (1750) and the Christian influence, down to Horace Mann (1842) and the Unitarian influence, and yet further down to John Dewey (1933) and the evolutionary humanist take-over of our education institutions.
In the words of Charles F. Potter, signatory of the first Humanist Manifesto, 1933,
“Education is thus a most powerful ally of humanism, and every public school is a school of humanism. What can the theistic Sunday school, meeting for an hour once a week, and teaching only a fraction of the children, do to stem the tide of a five-day program of humanistic teachings?”
Today, our classrooms are but transmission belts for the weird moral fetishes of humanist indoctrination; a mind-befogging and immorality-inducing process that leads to the adoption of atheism, materialism, politically correct ‘new morality,’ inhumanity, evolutionism, Cultural Marxism, New World Orderism, multiculturalism, sexual egalitarianism (hedonism/androgyny), cruelty, and other destructive anti-traditional views. As a consequence, Americans (and Christians) are walking away from America’s founding worldview---as well as God and their inalienable rights---due to the teaching of Evolutionary Humanism. After being befuddled, filled with unreasoning hatred and paranoid fear of God, Christianity, Orthodox Judaism, and traditional-values America, Americans’ become their own worst enemies. For as they mindlessly destroy traditional-values America in pursuit of universal peace, tolerance, diversity, and inclusion, they are unknowingly setting the stage for their own eventual enslavement and perhaps even death, as Evolutionary Humanism has a proven track-record of mass murder (genocide).
A brief comparison of our founding worldview versus Evolutionary Humanism’s three major permutations---Secular Humanism, Leninism-Marxism, and Post Modernism, will show us why this is occurring.
America’s Founding Judao-Christian Worldview 1. Theology: biblical theism 2. Philosophy: God/supernaturalism/metaphysics 3. Ethics: moral absolutes/Ten Commandments/sanctity of life 4. Biology: Creation 5. Psychology: mind/body dualism 6. Sociology: traditional family, church, state 7. Law: Divine/Natural Law 8. Politics: inalienable rights, individual freedom, justice, order 9. Economics: stewardship of property (private property), free markets
Secular Humanism, Marxism-Leninism, Post Modernism 1. Theology: atheism, atheism, atheism 2. Philosophy: naturalism, dialectical materialism, anti-realism 3. Ethics: moral relativism, proletariat morality, moral and cultural relativism 4. Biology: neo-Darwinism, punctuated evolution, punctuated evolution 5. Psychology: monism (self-actualization), monism (behaviorism), monism (socially constructed selves) 6. Sociology: alternative lifestyles and State control of children, classless society and State control of children, sexual egalitarianism and State control of children 7. Law: positive law, proletariat law, critical legal studies 8. Politics: secular world government, communist world government, secular world government 9. Economics: state control of resources, scientific socialism, state control of resources
As can be seen by this brief comparison, Evolutionary Humanism is not just the antithesis of our founding worldview it is completely destructive of it as well.
Observes William F. Buckley on the disintegration of traditional-values America,
“The most influential educators of our time---John Dewey, William Kilpatrick, George Counts, Harold Rugg, and the lot---are out to build a New Social Order. There is not enough room…for…religion (Christianity). It clearly won’t do…to foster within some schools a respect for an absolute, intractable God, a divine intelligence who is utterly unconcerned with other people’s versions of truth…It won’t do to tolerate a competitor for the allegiance of man. The State prefers a secure monopoly for itself…Religion (Christianity), then, must go…The fight is being won. Academic freedom is entrenched. Religion (Christianity) is outlawed in public schools. The New Social Order is larruping along.” (“Let Us Talk of Many Things,” p. 9-10)
Copyright Linda Kimball 2007 PatriotsandLiberty http://patriotsandliberty.com/
Linda is the author of numerous published articles and essays on culture, politics, and worldview. Her writings are published both nationally and internationally. Linda is a member of MoveOff.net/
Sources: Pushing the Antithesis, Greg L. Bahnsen Understanding the Times, David Noebel What is Scientific Naturalism? J.P. Moreland
Related Articles Can America Survive Evolutionary Humanism? Cultural Marxism
So you are opposed to western jurisprudence?
js1138..And your evidence for this is what?
Irish...A much respected criminal profiler once observed: “Thank God for narcissism.” When his students ask him to explain that remark, he tells them that although man’s Creator endowed man with free will, there are still consequences to be faced when one chooses to kick against the goad, so to speak. Narcissism is a nasty consequence of wrong moral choosing. Consider the BTK killer. Had his narcissism not forced him to confess, he’d be free still today. And yes, narcissism forces its ‘slave’ to do its bidding, whether making a public fool of oneself or being forced to publicly confess one’s wrongdoings, narcissism demands its ‘pound of flesh.’
What is my evidence, you ask? Why it’s EO Wilson himself. There is EO Wilson standing before his adoring acolytes and being made to confess to his hypocrisy, self-delusion and sheer stupidity. Amazing, isn’t it?
I would say the ultimate example of narcissism would be the claim that personal revelation trumps evidence available equally to all for examination.
What is your evidence for minds not associated with bodies?
js..Nonsense. The brain changes in response to consequences. Behavior is governed by consequenses
Irish...And just as in pre-Biblical paganism, man-—having no free will— is helpless before the forces of nature. Thus you’ll need to capitalize “Consequences,” since it is obviously one of these mystical Forces.
Free will is not a particularly good bludgeon against godless materialism. Theology has not solved the problem of free will, and there are plenty of Christians who believe that God’s omniscience precludes free will.
js..What is your evidence for minds not associated with bodies?
Irish...What is your empirical (sensory) evidence that you dream, js? And remember, your evidence must be something which can be seen, heard, etc. Simply telling us that you dream is not empirical evidence but a metaphysical claim which must be believed by faith.
Define free will. LOL
js...Free will is not a particularly good bludgeon against godless materialism
Irish...Wrong js. Before you are two creation accounts: “In the beginning God...,” and “In the beginning Nothing...then a spark...then Matter...” Now either you willfully chose the latter rather than the former, or ‘something’ else made you choose it in which case you’re a fleshy puppet through whose voicebox speaks Matter. Which is it?
Give me an example of a dreamer not associated with a physical body.
Good post. Thanks.
References to Christianity and Jesus' Crucifiction in the works of four major non-Christian writers of the late 1st and early 2nd centuries – Josephus, Tacitus, Suetonius, and Pliny the Younger, notwithstanding, h'mmmmmmmm?
In 2000 years, references to scientology will not be strong evidence for the biography of Xenu.
The discussion is is whether the evidence supporting the biography of Jesus is more extensive than the evidence supporting the presidency of John Adams.
I hope you can get a hold of the October 8th National Review and read the piece entire. I found the genetic algorithm a most fascinating little beastie...but in the space of a post here, couldn't elaborate.
In short, Manzi finds a clear correspondence between the function of a genetic algorithm (a purely mathematical structure) and the function/structure of the genome (a purely biological structure). Though he presents this as an "analogy," clearly the two share common features — selection, crossover, mutation (just as Darwin indicated) — and these features can be mathematically described. Which after all is what really makes them "scientific."
This article -- geared to the intelligent generalist public -- comes at a time when scientists are beginning to appreciate the importance of the successful communication of information in biological organization and, hence, biological evolution.
(If you have an interest, and can't get a hold of NR, please write to me privately.)
Again Andy -- thanks!
Appreciate the ping. I’m going to get a copy of Manzi’s article. Can I get you to translate it for me? (^:
js: Nonsense. The brain changes in response to consequences. Behavior is governed by consequenses.
Two questions there, right off of the bat.
In the first place, it seems to me that "personal revelation" doesn't "trump" anything. Oddly enough, it only seems to make the "anything" explicable in human terms according to reason, direct experience, culture, and plain common sense -- which are common to everybody (or at least human everybodies).
On the second question, Whether or not behavior is governed by "consequences." Fine. But consequences of what?
This the very "fuzzy zone" that scientific atheists and metaphysical naturalists (though not necessarily the methodological naturalists -- e.g., adherents of the scientific method in its proper "epistemologial starkness") seemingly refuse to define. Maybe according to their own method they know they legitimately can't do that. (But that doesn't prevent them from "philosophizing" all the same....)
Dear jw, you keep looking for evidence of minds not associated with bodies.
I'd suggest you might want to reverse that problem, and then maybe you could get better answers: Imagine a body not associated with a mind -- i.e., Try to imagine a natural body totally disconnected from intelligence.
In the second place, if we're going to speak of epiphenomena of the human brain, then it seems to me we first need to lay down the evidences put forth regarding the nature of the brain.
It seems clear at the outset that the brain is a chemical/physical system that somehow supports extraordinarily high rates of distributed information processing that appears to be indispensable to biological organization and the preservation in a living state of the biological organism.
Yet at that juncture, one easily gets the feeling that this is a problem that methodological naturalism must avoid -- in order to be consistent with itself -- which would be the problem of WHO or WHAT is (a) initiating the process?; and (b) to what purpose?
Dawkins assures us that both questions are illegitimate....
But then, he's an atheist; so what does he know?
Moreover, such intelligence could never possibly be the "epiphenomenon" of what the human mind, in its freedom from physical determinism, has freely chosen to observe.
Those are the HUMAN questions; and so I pay them great heed. Pshaw! is the answer I remit to the folks who say there is no such thing as human free will....
Anyhoot, think about it my friend. And give me a yell back if ever you feel like it.
No need for that, trust me on that dear MHGinTN: You will not encounter any problem with his presentation at all.
Manzi is perfectly straightforward. And it seems to me that the only way to dispense with his argument would be to demonstrate that the analogy that he establishes between the genetic algorithm and the form of the genome has no common foundation (thus cannot be a true analogy); i.e., that they are substantially different.
But evidently this would come as a surprise to a great many theoretical mathematicians and physicists these days.... :^)
We live in amazing times, dear brother in Christ!
However, the freedom we have in Christ Jesus has no earthly comparison.
So far the American judicial system has not completely bought into the atheist view that the mind is merely an epiphenomenon of the physical brain, a secondary phenomenon that cannot cause anything to happen.
Therefore, mitigating the death sentence for the mentally ill - or an insanity plea - isn't troubling in spite of attempts to separate culpability/punishment between a diseased mind and a healthy body.
A few decades down the road, if the atheists have their way with the non-causal epiphenomenal mind - that might morph into a splitting between brain and body. And that could be quite troubling indeed - how to punish a physical brain for a crime "it" committed without punishing the innocent body.
Even more interesting should the courts buy into the notion of strong determinism, i.e. the brain couldn't do other than what it did.
Disconnected from what?
Give me an example of an intelligence that does not require a body.
so it would be fine with you for students to put any answers they please to exam questions and receive full credit. The earth is a turnip floating in a sea of molasses.
It would be fine for engineers to use any tables of strengths at the flip of a coin when designing bridges.
I realize you don't like my point of view, but I would appreciate a little more thought and a little less smug.
It is a genuine strength and advantage of science and mathematics that people of all races, nationalities, political parties and religions can examine the same data an reach the same conclusions. It happens all the time. It is neither rare nor unusual.
It is true that at the cutting edge of research there are controversies, and it is also true that newer theories and understandings occasionally subsume older understandings.
Nevertheless, Newton can still get us to the moon and back, and Maxwell's equations still work for anyone designing circuits comprised more than a few atoms. There is no Muslim or Mormon set of Maxwell's equations, nor a Hindu set of Newton's laws.
This is a genuine achievement in the approach to acquiring knowledge, and the routine implementation of empirical methods is rather new in human history.
If you want to replace empiricism with something having even greater utility, kindly point to some achievement of your replacement system.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.