Darwin and the Descent of Morality

First Things ^ | November 2001 | Benjamin Wiker

[Phaedrus]

Quite aside from Darwinism as science, which it is not, Darwinism itself leads directly and inevitably to Social Darwinism, an extremely destructive philosophy with suitably destructive social impacts -- impacts that have become increasingly apparent in our culture in recent decades with the rising dominance of Darwinism in our public schools.

It is a costly pity that we as a culture have not achieved the clarity of thought and found th courage to say to Darwinism, simply, "Show me", and if it cannot, "Get out of the classroom!" It hasn't (shown us), it won't and it cannot, Folks. When do we give this scientific quackery a decent burial?

[Phaedrus]

ping . . .

[Phaedrus]

ping . . .

[logos]

Too late tonight, friend, but I'll check in tomorrow. Thanks for the 'ping'.

[jlogajan]

The flat-earthers rise again.

[John H K]

An important part of the current controversy over the theoretical status of evolutionary theory concerns its moral implications. Does evolutionary theory undermine traditional morality, or does it support it?

Frankly, who cares? That's like asking "Does the idea the earth revolves around the sun undermines traditional morality, or does it support it?"

Evolution just IS. There are millions of fossils in labs and universities around the world demonstrating it. People have to deal with it. Just because it's inconvenient to your world view or what your religion tells you can't toss it out.

Now counting the seconds before the first bald-faced liar says "THERE ARE NO TRANSITIONAL FOSSILS!!!!!

[Torie]

Maybe the problem with the article is the failure to separate social Darwinism from Darwinism. The two are not the same. And I suspect the selective quotes push Darwin too far into the social Darwinism category (that is not my impression as to the fact), but then I could be wrong.

[RadioAstronomer]

Agreed. The evidence for both biological and stellar (cosmic) evolution is overwhelming!

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the heads up!

[gg188]

Great post!!!

[f.Christian]

fossil thumpers!

[John H K]

Well, the problem with the interpretation of the article is creationists sort of project themselves on to evolution...that is, creationism is based entirely on the painfully literal interpretation of some exceedingly old religious writings, with not a scrap of actual evidence since (other than a handful of fraudulent pseudo-scientists with an agenda, like the Center for Creation Research or whatever it is.)

So they actually tend to over-focus on Darwin and the minutia of his various beliefs...much more so than actual evolutionists today. They assume that evolution, like creationism, is simply based on one old (but not nearly as old) book that they imagine is taught in schools and universities like some sort of religion or received wisdom. REAL evolutionists are too busy running around observing animals and digging up and dating thousands of fossils and putting together clear and obvious sequences of transitional fossils to spend all of their time examing Darwin. Darwin is respected, of course, for the original idea, but the science has moved on. Evolution is now based on immense stacks of fossils and data from the field, not Darwin..it's not "fossilized" like Creationism.

Thus, looking at Darwin's personal morality, philososphy, political beliefs is completely and utterly irrelevant to the evolution debate. He had an idea about evolution which has since been supported by the work of thousands of biologists, paleontologists, etc. in the field.

If Darwin had advocated raping and strangling all babies, or if it is discovered that Darwin's secret hobby was raping and strangling babies, it means Darwin was an evil sicko but doesn't mean jack squat for evolution or that the evidence for evolution is any less clear-cut.

[JDGreen123]

Thanks for the article! I have often pondered the true effects of Darwinism. If man is simply an animal then let the strongest survive. Much of the colonialism of the late 1800's was based on Darwinism. Hitler's Aryan ideal was an outgrowth of Darwinism. Communism had a Darwinian basis.

How sad that we went from the age of Jefferson and the nobility of man to the chaos and inhumanity of the post-Darwin world. It certainly can be argued that nearly all of society's problems have been greatly exacerbated due to the amoral foundation of Darwinism.

[f.Christian]

"What men believe... really matters"!

[Torie]

Yep that is all true. The problem with the article is that implied without really being explicit, that the bad odor of social Darwinism discredited the theory of evolution itself, which yes is itself evolving. I can understand why the article was not explicit. If it had been, it would be totally absurd. But the author was more clever than that. He is not without skill in agitating for his agenda.

[RadioAstronomer]

Thought you might like this. It made me laugh out loud :)

http://home.austarnet.com.au/stear/dave_williams.htm

[Chief Right Wing]

PING!!!

[sola gracia]

fossil thumpers!

ROTFLMBO!!!!!!! Priceless!!

[fortheDeclaration]

'Agreed. The evidence for both biological and stellar (cosmic) evolution is overwhelming'

REALLY!

Here is a quote from a statement on the NASA program 'Origins' 'Scientists believe that the universe was created about 15 billion years ago in a single violent even known as the Big Bang' Thats some real hard science there!

O Timothy, keep that is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings,and oppositions of science falsely so called:(1Tim.6:20)

Even so, come Lord Jesus