Darwin is truly a liberator!

0 votes

Darwin at 200: A Liberator Like Lincoln

by Edward Hudgins

February 12, 2009 -- Of the two famous men born on February 12, 1809, Abraham Lincoln is the one known as a political liberator.

But the other man, Charles Darwin, also deserves recognition on the bicentennial of his birth for his own form of Emancipation Proclamation.

Darwin's Origin of Species was published in 1859 and set forth the thesis that the various kinds of living organisms were not fixed and eternal but, rather, evolved from other, often less complex organisms over millions of years. In the century and a half that followed, this discovery has had a truly liberating effect on humanity.

We Want to Know

Understanding evolution has helped us satisfy that quintessential human longing expressed by Aristotle: "All men, by nature, desire to know." As self-conscious beings, we have a thirst to know the deepest truths about the world around us, its origin and ours, and our place in it. We are pattern-seeking animals who delight in discovery. Such understanding and, indeed, our very survival require us to exercise our rational capacity, the attribute that most distinguishes us from the lower life forms from which we evolved.

Observations, conceptual thinking and critical analysis have, over the centuries, allowed us to replace primitive superstitions with knowledge of objective reality. Copernicus, Galileo, Newton and Einstein have helped us understand the physical realm: that it operates with regularity in accordance with causal laws; that it is composed of infinitesimal atoms; that it is vast and includes planets, stars and galaxies; that it is billions of years old. And, of course, knowledge gained through this rational approach allows us to create all of the technologies needed for our survival and flourishing.

Darwin helped us understand the biological realm. He showed how small variations that naturally occur in living species plus the laws of natural selection in changing environments over long periods of time have produced the diverse plethora of living creatures on this planet. His discoveries explained the fossils of extinct life forms and of the ancestors of creatures living today, including humans, that are found in the strata of rocks dating back millions of years. Darwin's discoveries were yet another demonstration of the power of the human mind, discoveries that were subsequent confirmed by findings in many other scientific disciplines.

The knowledge of our evolutionary origins helps us to understand how we might act better for our own survival and well-being. For example, scientists in evolutionary biology and psychology today are exploring the nature of our brains: how they came about; how our form of cognition emerged in them; how they operate; how we might better treat brain-based physical and mental impairments; and how we might better exercise the self-control needed for our flourishing.

Understanding our evolutionary origins does not diminish us. Rather, it enables us to marvel at the fact that our minds emerged from nature and then to turn our minds back on nature in order to understand just how our minds emerged.

Shunning Our Higher Nature

Sadly, in the United States the facts of evolution have been politically and culturally contentious because of the disastrous religious beliefs that today go under the names "Creationism" and "Intelligent Design." Individuals, mostly on the conservative side of the political spectrum, often twist their own minds in tortuous ways unworthy of intelligent creatures in order to reject discoveries built up through rigorous observation and critical examination in favor of a Biblical fiction they just can't seem to give up.

Many of these "true believers" have created a cottage industry to promote the culture of ignorance necessary to support their cult beliefs. Witness their terrible waste of time, energy and, yes, human intelligence, over the past century. In the 1925 Scopes Trial these believers sought to uphold a ban on teaching evolution in schools. Today these believers try to force schools to teach Creationism and Intelligent Design as if they were approaches to understanding human origins that are just as valid as a critical, scientific approach. Observe the pointless passions in favor of the false. And consider the corrosive effects of such campaigns against modernity in a culture in desperate need of clear thinking.

Politically conservative Creationists often denounce those on the political left who reject evidence and blind themselves to the consequences of many of their statist policies. Yet such conservatives are guilty of the same willful epistemological crime in their own corner of the culture.

Darwin and a Free Society

There's an irony here because of a growing recognition today that Darwin's understanding of the mechanism of evolution supports many of the views of political conservatives who often reject evolution.

Darwin and his successors showed how order and complexity in biology do not require a grand designer. Genetic changes in organisms and natural selection are all that's necessary. Similarly, free-market economists like F.A. Hayek, building on insights of conservative political thinkers like Edmund Burke, have shown how order and complexity in the economy and society do not require a grand government designer. With minimalist laws protecting life, liberty and property, individuals pursuing their own self-interest will also produce peace and unprecedented prosperity. By contrast, government direction produces conflict and hampers the creation of wealth.

Michael Shermer, editor of Skeptic magazine and author of The Mind of the Market, rightly tells free-market conservatives that they should appreciate how understanding evolution boosts their case for liberty: Darwin is truly a liberator! And Shermer tells those on the political left who usually embrace discoveries of science such as evolution that they need to appreciate the implications of evolution for their own pet theories about government-run economies.

Morality from Human Nature

Some individuals still reject the facts about evolution out of an unanalyzed fear that, if they could articulate it, would amount to "How can humans have a morality if we evolved from lower animals? Doesn't this fact mean that anything goes?"

A fear, of course, can't negate facts. But in any case, the fear is unfounded. Just as an explanation of our biological origins does not need to rely on myths and alleged divine revelations, neither does morality. Indeed, the origins of morality are found in our nature as rational creatures with free choice who must understand the world around us and within us and develop principles to guide our conduct-morality-in order to survive and flourish.

Darwin was one of the most revolutionary and right thinkers in human history, up there with Newton and Einstein in terms of the implications of his discoveries. When we compare him to Lincoln by saying that he has liberated us from the slavery of ignorance and freed us to see the truth, we speak by analogy but no less truthfully. So let us celebrate the birth two hundred years ago of these two liberators who did so much for humanity.
----
Hudgins is director of advocacy and a senior scholar at The Atlas Society.

For further reading:

*Edward Hudgins, "What Are Creationists Afraid Of?" A 2005 essay published in An Objectivist Secular Reader , 2008, edited by Hudgins and available at the Objectivism Store.

*Charles Krauthammer, "Phony Theory, False Conflict." November 18, 2005.

*Michael Shermer, The Mind of the Market . Henry Holt & Co., 2007.

*Michael Shermer, Why Darwin Matters . Henry Holt & Co., 2006.

*George Will, "How Congress Trumps Darwin." February 8, 2009.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Fact is, we didn't come from fish. And no, I am no Christian.

There are major "missing links" all over the fossil record. All the scientists "assume" that these gaps just have not been discovered yet. But even Darwin himself said that "if the transitional species cannot be found, then the theory of macro-evolution should be abandoned." Well, you can't accuse them of not trying, but there are tens of thousands of "transitional species" that should be there but have never been found. So the "scientists" cover their tracks by saying "we have a bone in our ear like the fish has in it's head, so there's the proof that over sooooooo long, we were originally fish."

I don't know where humans came from. . . but while on the subject, where did cheetahs come from? Where did wheat, barley, and rice come from? These are a couple of example which will leave anyone who wants to cling to Darwin's macroevolution theories hanging by a thread - and they made that thread.

If people saw through thousands-year-old christian dogma, and they credit Darwin, then they were simply led from one form of ignorance and dis-empowerment to another.

I am not a Christian - and I can take-or-leave anything bible related. But there is no freaking way we came directly from monkeys, or apes, and any reasonable person who studies it will see this. Only those who are afraid of not having the question answered, or afraid of holding a "controversial opinion" will see it otherwise.

-

Darwin - FAIL

Darwin was a tool. He was a dreamer, a bird watcher and a philosopher not a scientist. He observed iguanas and exotic animals to help prove his own opinion on the origin of human life. Findings to support a theory are not science - they are propaganda. Evolution (much like the Inquisition) can be a powerful tool in the hands of corrupt government to strip people of their sensibilities and personal moral framework. What follows is the destruction of Liberty and God-given rights. This is not to say that a nation must be a Christian nation but that a nation based on Freedom should recognize a supreme inherent right to every human being as distinct from the slime and the ooze from which we supposedly evolved by random chance.

yes

mens penises are a complete accident that happen to accidentally fit in a woman's vagina to create life. When science can create life, I may look at Darwin's BS theory, until then, I refuse to believe you or I am an accident.

Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must. like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it.-Thomas Paine

The R3volution requires action, not observation!!!!

I feel that this whole article

Is a conditioned response.

Lincoln is good.

Darwin is good.

Evolution is science,

You have been conditioned response from twelve years of government school, and government sponsered college, and tv, and radio, ect...

Seriously this is a propaganda piece that you have to be conditioned to like.

Why do people fall for devisive posts?

,

Ron Paul "Sign Wave Across the USA" -- November 5th!

Beats me.

Trolls, maybe.

But there seems to be no stopping either the threads or the responses. I wish there were an un-bump feature.

apparently

neither of you can resist them either ;)

Bump for the Species

I'm bumping this in hopes that I evolve a gene which prevents me from bumping controversial and/or infamous posts on political forums.

Darwinism is a WORLDVIEW, Not Science

Darwinian evolution is just a humanistic way of interpreting natural data about living things. As a worldview, it is filled with unargued assumptions about the nature of natural matter. Since no human was there in the beginning to observe the first living organism created, any information about the origin of living things becomes a matter of faith. In essence, both creationists and evolutionists argue their cases on the foundation of faith (that which is unseen by the five senses).

Darwinism is simply a humanistic way of explaining away the obvious evidence which we observe in nature--it was created by God. The reason why people cling to Darwin's ideas so much is because they don't want to acknowledge God. There are plenty of evidences to unequivocally prove God created the universe, but the evolutionist must first give up his materialistic assumptions which blind him from seeing the evidence that complex things come from a complex being. Darwinism simply turned men from science to science fiction by its rejection of such a notion.

Of course, when God was taken out of the equation, materialism became a god. From this, absolutes were eradicated, and nature was given as the standard by which the universe should be exclusively understood. Men were degraded to animals, and thus entered social ramifications of Darwin's ideas upon society. Things such as eugenics, abortion, and racism were justified as right because they flowed from Darwin's naturalistic interpretation of reality and the physical world, as a supposed struggle for life by means of natural selection.

So, in a sense, Darwin's outlook on natural phenomena changed the world, but it did so at the cost of stripping away any dignity and purpose from mankind. Its worldview is a direct opposition to God's revelation, and because of Darwin's ideas, it bred a spider web of misery and confusion upon mankind that was unseen in the history of human existence. Instead of elevating man to being created in God's image, Darwin subjected men to being nothing more than cousins with the bananas, birds, and baboons.

lol... leave it up to

lol... leave it up to philosophers to ignore fundamental laws of science and logic to push their self-contradictory humanistic ideals. These pseduo-intellectuals laud a man that plagiarized most of his ideas from his Uncle and ancient Greek philosophies all because they think it frees humanity from the guilt of their evil. Be not deceived, there will be a day of reckoning when the Judge of all the earth will pass judgment.

Lincoln was a dictator and a

Lincoln was a dictator and a tyrant who suspended the rights of Americans and ordered the abuse of his fellow citizens. Darwin was a guy with a theory that has never been proven and diminishes the very notion that we are created in His image.

Sorry Dr. galtgulch, but just like your arguments in the past, you are wrong again, this time on both counts.

Ron Paul 2012 - It's Almost Here!

True Dat!

The only reason Lincoln freed the slaves was to get the Csarina's money.

Here we go again.

I have a very strong opinion about this subject. I used to post and engage in argument about it on talk.origins twenty years ago. No one changed my mind, and I do not think I changed anyone else's. It has little if anything that I can see that relates to the Liberty cause. But it is an excellent topic for stirring up division and ill will.

Neo-Evolution = Global Warming

I reject the UN Agenda 21 Sustainable development evolution THEORY I call, NEO Evolution.

The UN agenda says that nothing is created, all things have evolved (since the big bang) This is rendering us to SLAVES!!! Be warned!

My problem with this is that I believe human beings are creative. I believe that prosperity comes from creativness, it takes TALENT to connect the dots, to build a wheel. Now the UN has a whole new plan, and that plan is not what I would call human friendly. Perhaps they are computer dependent?

I believe the Catholic Church is about to "give it up" for Darwin, because the Catholic Church, like the USA, and our entire establishment is being sent down the drain, labled UNsustainable.

Here is another take to evolution http://solohq.org/Articles/Parille/Ayn_Rand_and_Evolution.shtml

WE ARE GOING TO WIN!
___.---.___
.' ( ) '.
) /)' '( )
',_( ';-;'\_,'
|-|
(")

You are no longer in GOD's image. bub

WELL , evolution proves ONE thing to this unitelligent person..The smarter man thinks he has become the more problems he creates for me & mine....NOT too intelligent in my humble opinion..LIKE your "intelligent" thinking...you-no

This is a joke, right?

We are endowed by our CREATOR with certain unalienable rights...

Darwinism dismisses the CREATOR, therefore MAN gives rights and also has the ability to take them away.

What God has given, no man can take away.

What Dear Leader Obamessiah gives, he may also take.

Darwin is no Liberator, he enabled Marx, Engles, Hitler, Mao - et al.

No joke but

I sure wouldn't have said it this way.

Even so, Darwin was a great man. One can believe in God and not believe in absolute literal interpretation of any documents of faith for any creed. I can only say that Darwin came to believe that man cannot comprehend God.

Support our republic and the liberty it provides - Todd

Support our republic and the liberty it provides - Todd

BS

Darwinism lends to tyranny. It has to. If there is no outside standard for truth (ie God), then we must submit to the superior intellectuals amongst us. The globalist latched on to darwinism to enslave us and promoted it because it furthered thier agenda. The state had to break people's alegience to their families and to their God, these were the only 2 things keeping people from being completely dependant upon the ruling class. Research Horrace Mann, John Dewey, Marx, Rouseu, etc read some John Taylor Gatto if you want to find out more...

If you want to argue the crusade BS, then go ahead, I think that was just intellectual tyranny as well, just twisting religion to promote it. Even if Darwin was sincere and even if what he teaches is true, the fact is that the globalist have coopted his teachings to control the population.

The true God is a personal one, and because of Christ you don't need some elitist to serve as your priest or prophet.

Check your premises!

It is so typical of those who reject reason to simply make arbitrary ad hominem assertions. Reality is the standard of truth for by definition truth is an identification of reality.

Your "faith" in a supernatural deity has no basis in reality and no means to test the validity or any assertions attributed to your fantastical deity.

Science has won the battle with religion as the only true source of valid facts about any aspect of reality including ethics. Man's life on earth is the only reasonable standard to use to determine if an action is good or evil. The use of one's faculty of reason is good by this standard, as is, focusing your mind to check the validity of your premises.

Faith is a willingness to accept something as being true for which there is no rational evidence. Big mistake, especially when you sacrifice your own judgment to accept the assertions of others about what is true and what is ethical.

I suggest, gentle reader, that you use your own judgment in all matters and be careful not to mistake your own wishes with facts of reality.

I would suggest that you read Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand to see a dramatization of the clash and contrast between the rational comprehensive integrated view of existence of the positive heroes in it with the irrational view of existence with its irrational anti life self sacrificial code of ethics which prevails in the real world.

Then go on to read Ayn Rand's essays The Virtue of Selfishness and Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal and For The New Intellectual for those willing to challenge the primitive, medieval dogma which was responsible for the Dark Ages when there was no separation of Church and State and the Inquisition.

One hopes that Ron Paul supporters have a free society in mind and not a Theocracy with intolerant people like the above poster in charge.

Notice the wording of the first amendment in the Constitution: no establishment of religion, but free exercise of religion.

"I swear by my life and my love of it that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine" Ayn Rand in Atlas Shrugged p731

"I swear by my life and my love of it that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine" Ayn Rand in Atlas Shrugged p731

Read it

Atlas Shrugged is one of my favorites, but it's fundamentally flawed. Rand should have taken her own advice and checked her premise.

Tell me...

How many existentialists have created Libertene Constitutional Republics?

Now there is some BS

We MUST submit? Says who?

Support our republic and the liberty it provides - Todd

Support our republic and the liberty it provides - Todd

Exactly!

"We MUST submit? Says who?"

You are appealing to a superior intellegence/authority to verify whether or not my statement is true. That's my point.

And Ayn Rand

Great post

WE ARE GOING TO WIN!
___.---.___
.' ( ) '.
) /)' '( )
',_( ';-;'\_,'
|-|
(")