Is biological evolution a scientific fact we shouldn’t dispute?

Biologists have extensively modeled biology using Darwin’s theory of evolution. The dispute over the accuracy of this model involves not only biology, but geology and archaeology. The actual dispute is beyond the scope or practicality of this Web page. The scope here is to show that such discussion should continue, not only at the cutting edge of biology, but also in the beginner’s classroom.

Science has never been static. The complexity of the world demands making approximations to form generalizations into a solvable and logical model. These approximations cause limitations to the model. Scientists look for inconsistencies between their scientific models and the real world to improve their models.

The consequences of a blind application of Darwin’s theory compel us to question the accuracy the model when applied to society and government. People making such application may only have a few basic classes in biology.

In Chapter 3, "Comparison Of The Mental Powers Of Man And The Lower Animals" of The Descent Of Man And Selection In Relation To Sex, Charles Darwin wrote,

“My object in this chapter is to shew that there is no fundamental difference between man and the higher mammals in their mental faculties.”

An application of this idea today is animal rights. A champion of animal rights is bioethicist Peter Singer at Princeton University. However, the disturbing part of Dr. Singer’s ethics isn’t the rights he gives to animals, but the rights he takes away from humans by making them equivalent to animals. For example, he said that parents should be allowed to kill babies born with birth defects. As a result, the handicapped have protested Dr. Singer’s statements. He also made similar statements about parents in nursing homes.

Are we willing to take the next step and claim there is no fundamental difference between human and animal standards of behavior? In the twentieth century, a common description of sexually immoral behavior was behaving as animals. However, The New York Times article, “In Most Species, Faithfulness Is a Fantasy,” (March 18, 2008) explains conjugal infidelity from animal behavior, as if animal behavior were also a standard for humans. Both thoughts recognize sexual temptations as embedded in the biology of animals. The difference is the source of faithfulness rather than unfaithfulness. This article looks for marriage-like behavior in animals as the reason for marriage among humans. However, neither anthropology nor history supports monogamy as an embedded in human behavior. A moral commitment to focus one’s sexual desires and fulfillment on one’s mate is the basis of monogamy.

In Chapter 4, "On The Affinities And Genealogy Of Man," of The Descent Of Man And Selection In Relation To Sex, Charles Darwin wrote,

“At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the savage races throughout the world.”

In Chapter 5, “On The Development Of The Intellectual And Moral Faculties During Primeval And Civilised Times,” Darwin extensively discussed the impact of modern societies kindness to the weak:

With savages, the weak in body or mind are soon eliminated; and those that survive commonly exhibit a vigorous state of health. We civilised men, on the other hand, do our utmost to check the process of elimination; we build asylums for the imbecile, the maimed, and the sick; we institute poor-laws; and our medical men exert their utmost skill to save the life of every one to the last moment. There is reason to believe that vaccination has preserved thousands, who from a weak constitution would formerly have succumbed to small-pox. Thus the weak members of civilised societies propagate their kind. No one who has attended to the breeding of domestic animals will doubt that this must be highly injurious to the race of man. It is surprising how soon a want of care, or care wrongly directed, leads to the degeneration of a domestic race; but excepting in the case of man himself, hardly any one is so ignorant as to allow his worst animals to breed.

The aid which we feel impelled to give to the helpless is mainly an incidental result of the instinct of sympathy, which was originally acquired as part of the social instincts, but subsequently rendered, in the manner previously indicated, more tender and more widely diffused. Nor could we check our sympathy, even at the urging of hard reason, without deterioration in the noblest part of our nature. The surgeon may harden himself whilst performing an operation, for he knows that he is acting for the good of his patient; but if we were intentionally to neglect the weak and helpless, it could only be for a contingent benefit, with an overwhelming present evil. We must therefore bear the undoubtedly bad effects of the weak surviving and propagating their kind; but there appears to be at least one check in steady action, namely that the weaker and inferior members of society do not marry so freely as the sound; and this check might be indefinitely increased by the weak in body or mind refraining from marriage, though this is more to be hoped for than expected.

The Nazis adopted the last two quotes of Darwin to justify genocide of races they considered inferior. All three quotes are logical conclusions to the biological model of evolution. If one accepts this model as unquestioned fact, then why would one reject Darwin’s logical conclusions? You may reject these conclusions based on moral principles, but how many generations will it take for an unquestioned scientific model to override conflicting morality? If Darwin’s conclusions about how we should treat the weak and handicapped as well as how we should treat other cultures and races are false, then shouldn’t we recognize this as where the biological model of evolution fails to match up with reality? And, these are matters that concern the beginning biology student, not just the cutting edge biologist.

©2008 Perry Vernon Webb. You may quote this page in part or the whole as long as you
1) do not alter the wording and
2) reference this Internet page as the source of the quote.

How to receive a new life in Christ.

Click next to Bible references to open Logos Bible Software Series X directly to the passage. Learn more about linking directly to Logos and find other web sites that support integrated Bible study.

Back to "Answers to Some Philosophical Questions".

Back to home page.

Email: [email protected]