Author: Ayoub Rasekh
Modern Atheism in the Balance of Critique (part 8)
Evolution and Natural Selection
In the previous sections (Foundations of Modern Atheism), naturalism and rationalism were discussed and examined as the most important foundations of modern atheism, and various topics surrounding them were presented. In this section, “evolution and natural selection” are addressed as the third main foundation of modern atheism. Unlike the two previous foundations, which were largely philosophical in nature, this foundation has taken on a completely scientific appearance. This appearance has turned it into a powerful tool in the hands of modern atheists for promoting a materialistic worldview and denying any form of the sacred.
The theory of evolution proposed by Charles Darwin is considered a major scientific achievement. According to it, within populations of living organisms there exist individual differences (variation), and those that, by chance, possess traits better adapted to the environment have a greater chance of surviving and passing their traits on to future generations. With the accumulation of these variations and changes over long periods of history, the conditions for the emergence of new species are created.
Modern atheists, by combining this scientific theory with a particular philosophical interpretation of it, have used it as a complete weapon against religious beliefs. However, it is only a scientific theory within the field of Biology, and even if it were assumed to be correct, it would never eliminate the need for a First Cause (The creator).
Obviously, when we wish to speak about evolution and natural selection, it seems necessary to organize the discussion around three important issues:
-
The main claim of the theory: In biology, what does this theory claim regarding the origin and development of living beings?
-
The scientific support of the theory: What evidence exists to support the claims of this theory, and how reliable is this evidence?
-
The implications of the theory: What impact does understanding this theory have on our beliefs in areas such as religion and morality?
Distinguishing between these three issues is important in several respects. Addressing the first two issues belongs to evolutionary biologists. However, the third issue is independent of the first two, and answering it is the responsibility of philosophers and scholars. [1]
Separating these two groups from each other appears necessary, because history has shown that sometimes philosophers and scholars have entered discussions and issues that were not within their field of expertise. Likewise, biologists have expressed views in areas related to religion and philosophy in which they possessed little or no expertise. [2]
Both groups, when facing a general audience, have inevitably adopted a defensive posture. They have ignored important evidence and arguments and have engaged in improper reasoning against the opposing view, which has only increased the ambiguity and complexity of the issue. [3] Modern atheists have taken advantage of this very ambiguity and complexity and, by presenting philosophical Darwinism in place of evolutionary biology, attempt to impose a particular and entirely materialistic narrative of the world.
Natural Selection is one of the important and foundational components of the Theory of Evolution. It can even be regarded as the conceptual framework of evolutionary biology. However, the central claims that modern atheists adopt as the basis of their arguments, based on their particular interpretation of this theory, are as follows:
-
Denial of a Wise Designer: The main claim is that the complexity of life and the diversity of species do not require any wise designer or supernatural cause, and that natural selection alone is sufficient to explain them.
-
Material explanation of the human being: Human beings and all their distinctive characteristics, including morality, consciousness, and emotions, are nothing more than the final product of the process of natural selection and possess no higher purpose or transcendent meaning.
-
A purposeless universe: Life and its evolution are considered to be devoid of any purpose, goal, or predetermined plan.
-
Evolution in place of creation: Religious narratives of creation are rejected and are regarded not as symbolic expressions of truth but as incorrect rivals to the scientific explanation of natural history. [4] This claim is based on the “conflict theory” between science and religion, which will be examined in later sections.
-
Reducing religion to an evolutionary phenomenon: Religious beliefs and spiritual feelings are not accepted as a transcendent reality. Instead, they are presented as products of evolution and as tools that increased the chances of social survival for early humans.
Therefore, the theory of evolution, as a scientific theory within Biology, is valid and worthy of respect within its own domain. However, modern atheism has unjustifiably used it as a basis for denying the existence of God. Our task is to defend the validity of science within its proper limits and to demonstrate the reality that the theory of evolution can never serve as evidence for the denial of divine wisdom in creation or the meaninglessness of human life. At best, this theory describes how changes in life occur, but it never provides an answer to why life exists or what its ultimate purpose is.
To be continued…
Previous Part
References:
- Shahbazi and others, 1395: 170.
- Ibid.
- Sweetman, 2010: 82.
- Morris, 1974.
