Evolutionary Humanism: the Antithesis

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.

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)

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

If they aren't confirmable by the methods of science they aren't confirmable in any way that is convincing. All kinds of things are asserted by charlatans -- ESP, precognition, remote viewing -- you name it. If the phenomenon vanishes under scrutiny, it might as well be rubbish....

Ah, but if I've understood William James correctly, the phenomenon in question does not vanish under scrutiny. Science can "see it"; it just can't "explain" it. It has no method for explaining the observed mental phenomena of, for instance, intention, attention, and will. These are not involved with processing data of sense perception coming in from the external world, but are activities that are purely internal to the mind. And they can generate phenomenal effects in the exteral world. In other words, their contents do not arise from external stimulation, but from free selections and combinations of data that can be accessed from memory, which can then be additionally "processed" in new and different combinations, in newly meaningful ways.

There is no evidence to support the theory that this is "just" the brain doing all this. The brain facilitates, but is not the driver, of processes such as these. IOW, they are not epiphenomena of brain neural activity. Moreoever, as noted, since they can lead to external empirical effects, we can't call them epiphenomena; for part of the definition of an epiphenomenon is that it is something that cannot cause anything to happen.

There is no evidence to support the theory that this is "just" the brain doing all this.

Nothing except a hundred years of investigation into what happens when bits of the brain are damaged, and thousands of studies of brain activity using NMRI.

On the other side, you can't cite a single study showing any "mental" phenomenon that is not associated with brain activity.

...you can't cite a single study showing any "mental" phenomenon that is not associated with brain activity.

Does the Internet per se qualify?

But I did not say that mental activity is "not associated" with brain activity. In fact, I said that the brain is a facilitator, but evidently not itself the driver, of the mental processes I mentioned (intention, attention, will). I do not think that NMR imaging could "capture" these phenomena. But that doesn't mean that such mental phenomena do not exist: They are the primary constituents of every thought process....

There is no location for memory. Memory is embodied in the structure and connections of the brain. If you wipe out enough structure you wipe out memories.

There is an artist who can no longer recall or think about color. He is quite lucid and can still do art, but his conception and memory of color is gone.

Many kinds of behavior follow this pattern: wipe out the area supporting the function and the function is gone. There is no evidence that mental events can take place that are no associated with neural activity.

Plants have “behavior.” It’s called tropism.

Perhaps you've heard the story of Einstein and a biology colleague friend also working at Princeton, who showed to Einstein the amazing activities of amoebas when their food is scarce, how they send out a signal to draw other amoebas together to form a 'stalk' that solidifies to make a storage for their genetic material so that when food becomes abundant again the remaining DNA inside the stalk can break out and reproduce.

That activity is done entirely without a brain as you would define it. There is purpose of a kind and that is what startled Einstein when he saw it. What do you think of that data?

That activity is done entirely without a brain as you would define it.

Plants do even more sophisticated things without neurons. They do have physical bodies, however, and I don't see anyone campaigning to give them citizenship status.

It amuses me to see folks argue out of one side of their mouths that we are not descended from single celled organisms, and that complex systems such as the brain could not possibly have evolved stepwise from simpler systems, but then, out of the other side, point out that functions such as tropisms, light sensitivity and such exist at the "lowest" levels of living things.

Tropisms are not nearly as sophisticated as neural activity, but they probably reflect some of the genetic heritage of the brain. We can just about understand tropisms at the level of chemistry. We will eventually understand the brain.

I’m sorry, I missed the connection between what I asked and what you offered: “Plants do even more sophisticated things without neurons. They do have physical bodies, however, and I don’t see anyone campaigning to give them citizenship status.” Perhaps you’d be so kind as to show me the connection with what I posted and ‘campaigning to give them citizenship status’. Was that just meant to be your method of derision in some obtuse condsecending way, or did you have a point of connection that I missed?

History is littered with abandoned arguments from incredulity.

Sure. So the fact that we a naturalist view will eventually win must be inevitable?

Well sometimes the incredible turns out to be true. That is why they tend to be recorded in History. They are remarkable.

But consider a minute and you ought realize the vast majority of incredible propositions continue to lack credibility for good cause. Nobody bothers to claim "no runner will ever beat the 4 microsecond mile". The only claim made out loud was "no runner will ever beat the 4 minute mile." The former was too ridiculous to even make. Like material consciousness, the four microsecond mile is not plausible -- but at least we can understand what it actually means which is more then we can say for material consciousness.

But the remarkable thing is that we understand a lot about how the brain works, and the understanding is growing.

And as it does, and as absolutely no clue of what consciousness could possibly be is yet forthcoming, the weight of evidence grows against your view. Not that I mean an extra material mind is a valid scientific theory. A scientific theory needs to be something that could conceivably be falsified. But in this case it is something too axiomatic to human existence. More like an overly modest theory that "some material exists in the universe". Its so obvious there is no way to test it. At most you can conceive a theoretical universe where we are brains in jars being shown illusion. While nobody takes the brain and the jar thing as a serious possibility, at least we can conceive of such a thing, so reason does not rule it out entirely.

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.