Saturday, February 6, 2010

Moral Darwinism by Wiker

I thought I would share some of this very useful book. Wiker brings out how Christians unknowingly accepted from some who claimed to be Christians an Epicurean worldview in the 1600's and 1700's. Instead of keeping the discoveries of science as part of a Christian rooted worldview or outlook, and just accepting this as evidence for it; some came along persuading the culture to accept beliefs like this: that matter has always existed and the universe is infinite in size. (Both of which are claims that are highly dubious as far as evidence 'fit' and not accepted by many varied stripes of cosmologists. Apparently even 'father' Epicurus of the materialist worldview admitted a need for a Creator/Starter against his hope otherwise). The resulting idea of chance, infinite worlds, possible worlds, and matter with no limits ended up creating a sort of comfort for some to abandon a unique Incarnation of Christ. One creature, one planet. Wiker's argument (in an un-fairly broad summary I admit) in the book is that the moral chaos in the West is the result of thinking all is chance and no one is right about morality for others. The thinking of Epicurus was such that it wasn't based on research of the world/worlds/mathematical infinity, but rather it was based on his moral desire to be able to sin without any fear of judgment; something he essentially admits at points. We should probably be suspicious of claims of never ending chances for life to form from someone: why? When the detail of that evolutionary and materialist world happening pro life forming as we know it, is considered there exists a sheer complexity of cosmology. This complexity is accepted by serious scholars in that field, as well as the obvious view that there was a beginning to it all which is accepted. This looked less like Epicurus and 17th century so-called science had wanted, and hence less like Darwin's view and less like public school biology mythos. Biological research has shown a like picture of extreme complexity at the cell level and in the formation of systems that would die apart from a full function up front. The result is that evolution as Darwin saw it is not possible (some have obviously attempted adjustments, but the problems glare on when planning and intelligence is required to order such systems (they are systems at that level, highly complex)). You can see how theories of men and women in our day are given god-like attitudes/authority, even contrary to findings about cosmology and biology in this book. There is an effort, not unlike the scandal of climate researcher emails, to try and manipulate the evidence to fit an evolutionary scheme for the sake of having moral freedom to sin without judgment ever coming from God. In our day, evolution is a prop used to keep a sort of secular so called neutrality, which really has its own religious opinions (ie is a religion itself while playing 'neutrality'). Maybe more on this later, just some early thoughts...

2 comments:

David Keuss said...

Lucretius, a philosopher, also advocated according to Wiker that material atoms were to be made the measure of all there is and we are accidents of chance. The author also shows how this has practical moral impact on our culture, such as on abortion views. Culture of course buys into (we might add) this in high school via taxpayers' expense, because the teacher said so, because the text book said so, ad infinitum.

David Keuss said...

Isaac Newton said while trying to navigate the waters of a materialism he sort of adopted and also a view of an actual (not merely posited) God: 'all material things seem to have been composed of the hard and solid particles above mentioned, variously associated in the first creation by the counsel of an intelligent agent. For it became Him who created them to set them in order. And if He did so, it's unphilosophical to seek for any other origin of the world, or to pretend that it might arise out of a chaos by the mere laws of Nature, though, being once formed, it may continue by those laws for many ages.'