|
Natural
Selection and Moral Decay
by Mano Singham
In a
previous article, I discussed why some religious people found
evolutionary theory so upsetting. It was because natural selection
implies that human beings were not destined or chosen to be what
they are.
While I can understand why this is
upsetting to religious fundamentalists who believe they were created
specially in God's
image and are
thus part of a grand cosmic plan, there is still a remaining
puzzle and that is why they are so militant in trying to have
evolution not taught in schools or its teaching to be undermined
by inserting fake cautions about its credibility. After all,
if a person dislikes evolutionary theory for whatever reason,
all they have to do is not believe it.
I have had students who,
after taking my physics courses, say that they cannot believe
the theories of the origins of the
universe that I taught them because those theories conflict
with their
religious beliefs, specifically their belief about a young
Earth. I don't try to get them to change their views. I tell
them that
they are perfectly free to believe what they want and that
it is not my duty to try and force them to agree with me.
I believe
that the purpose of science courses is to teach students
the scientific paradigms that scientists use so that they will
be able to use them in their own work. All I ask of my students
is that they demonstrate to me that they understand how the
scientific
paradigms work and know how to use them within the scientific
contexts in which they apply. I do not require them to swear
allegiance to the theories themselves.
So it was initially
puzzling to me why some people were objecting to the teaching
of evolution. Why not let students learn
it as best as they can so that they can function effectively
in
the
world of science? After all, evolutionary theory is one
of the cornerstones of modern science and to reject it as a
framework for research is, frankly, to declare oneself
to be a non-scientist.
It is true that some students will
like the theory and accept it. Other won't. But that would be their
individual
choices.
What would be the harm in that?
But my conversations with
the ID people revealed that they have a much darker view of the
consequences of teaching
evolution. Let me try and summarize as best as I can
their
line of reasoning.
Their position is that America is
currently in a state of deep moral decay. They look back on the
past and
see a time
when
the country was much more morally wholesome and they
see the cause
of the degeneration as due to people moving away
from religious doctrines and towards a more secular outlook.
And they
see this shift as coinciding with the introduction
of widespread teaching
of evolution in schools.
They believe that you cannot
have a moral sense unless it is rooted in the Bible. Not having
the Bible as
a basis for
absolute
moral standards results in the slippery slope of
moral relativism and situational ethics, where
there are
no absolutes and
what is a right or wrong choice is determined by
the context.
They pin the blame for this shift
in morals directly on evolutionary theory. They argue that teaching
evolution means teaching
that human beings are not God's special creation.
This leads to
atheism and hence to moral decay.
So the fight
against the teaching of evolution is seen by them as a fight
for America's very
soul and
this
explains the passion
which is expended by them on what, to the rest
of us, might seem just another aspect of the
science curriculum.
It
also
means
that the ultimate goal of the movement is the
complete elimination of any teaching of evolution,
and that
the current push to
introduce ID as merely an "alternative
theory" is
just the first step in a longer-term strategy.
While
this line of reasoning can be criticized
on very many different levels (and I will do
so in a
later
posting), I
was impressed
with the sincerity of many of the people
at the ID meeting who made it. They are doing
what they
do
because they
care about
the souls of all of us, and are trying to
save us from ourselves. But some of the leaders
and spokespersons
of the ID movement
are not as straightforward as their followers.
They hide this broader argument and try to
portray what
they are
doing as
purely an issue of science and that they
would be satisfied
if ID was
accepted as an alternative to evolution.
(I will discuss this so-called 'wedge strategy'
later.)
This is why ID advocates feel they
cannot allow the teaching of evolution. For them
it is not
just a
scientific theory
they have problems with. They see this
as a battle for the soul
of America, and the world.
Top of page
|