I have been researching the history of the Creationism VS. Darwinism debate, and it appears that one strong impetus for opposition to Darwinian theory in general was the rise of Social Darwinism. One particular force for the development of this controversy in the U.S. was William Jennings Brian, who opposed the theory of evolution, and actively campaigned against, it for two reasons. First, he believed that what he considered a materialistic account of the descent of man through evolution undermined the Bible. (One might assume that he preferred a literal interpretation of Genesis 1 & 2.) Second, he saw neo-Darwinism or Social Darwinism, which tends to support forcefulness and aggressiveness over loving kindness and meekness, as a great evil force in the world promoting hatreds and conflicts, especially the World War.*
In The Literal Meaning of Genesis Saint Augustine argued that Genesis should be interpreted as God forming the Earth and life from pre-existing matter and allowed for an allegorical interpretation of the first chapter of Genesis. He argues that the six-day structure of creation presented in the book of Genesis represents a logical framework, rather than the passage of time in a physical way. Augustine recognizes that the interpretation of the creation story is difficult, and remarks that Christians should be willing to change their minds about it as new information comes up. He also warned believers not to rashly interpret things literally that might be allegorical, as it would discredit the faith. *
The entire Creationism vs. Evolution debate has been a real source of contention and conflict in this country. It has polarized the scientific community in opposition to the religious community to the extent that scientists have become embarrassed to confess their belief in religion and many Christians have come to distrust science. (There is even some thought that the distrust engendered by this debate has been used by greedy industrialists in their efforts to discredit scientific evidence for global warming.) There is evidence in the arguments made on the Creationist side that ignorance of the nature of scientific research and theory-building is not only prevalent but valued. There is also evidence that atheists see this vocal Creationism movement as representative of all religion and use it as a strong argument for their position.
It seems a great pity that such a destructive controversy as this might have arisen from a mistaken belief that the biological/historical theory of The Evolution of Species by Natural Selection leads inevitably to disbelief in God or to a belief that “might makes right.” The theory of evolution works both as an explanation for the known data about the nature of life and as a means for predicting other observations and forming testable hypotheses. Theories of social Darwinism, while predicting that a better armed country will win a war and that a bully will get his way on the playground, do not provide any basis for morality. Indeed, moral decisions that come from such theories could lead to the destruction of civilization and the end of life on Earth. The theory of Evolution, on the other hand, gives scientific support to the belief that we are all related. That is, all humans come from the same pair, and all of life comes from the same primordial seed. It would be better for Christianity if all Christians would graciously accept Evolution of Species, just as the Christian community finally accepted that the earth revolved around the sun.
*[Paragraph contains quotes from articles in Wikipedia]
Sunday, July 11, 2010
Creationism VS. Darwinism debate
Labels:
Augustine,
creationism,
Darwin,
evolution,
faith,
genesis,
philosophy,
theory
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Yes. I believe that we humans KNOW nothing, all that we have is what we believe. We should never believe in anything so strongly that we refuse to consider the possibility that there may exist evidence to the contrary. We do not dictate reality, it dictates us, and it is our job to understand that reality by our relationships to and in it. An open mind is necessary. I know what I believe and why, convince me otherwise and I will be grateful. Be convincing! By more than faith and insistence alone. If we as humans are unconvinced, do not blame us, just be more convincing. These words of mine seem to me to agree with your points.
ReplyDelete"These words of mine seem to me to agree with your points." Yes, the specific issue of the debate, "Creationism vs. Darwinism" is not really the central issue. What I consider to be the central issue is freeing ourselves from blind imitation of other people's beliefs.
ReplyDeleteAs for Faith, I believe that that word does not mean what most people think that it means. (See "Creationism vs. Darwinism debate II")