Evolution is a religion
From EvoWiki
Contents |
Claim
Evolution is a religion because it encompasses views of values and ultimate meanings.
Source
- Morris, Henry M., 1974. Scientific Creationism, Master Books, Arkansas, pp. 196-200.
Responses
- This claim is false as the scientific theory of evolution does not say anything about values or meanings. While some people may add on such constructs to the theory, in doing so they form a separate philosophy which should not reflect on the theory itself.
- This claim is false as the theory of evolution says absolutely nothing about the origin or destiny of souls and or spirits.
- If Evolution is a religion, then why do the alleged evolutionists recognize no formal priesthood, no holy texts, no holy laws, nor even prayers or rituals?
- To the extent that this claim is true at all, it is true only if one accepts an overly-expansive definition of "religion", under which any number of unrelated things (all of science, being a devoted sports fan, etc) would count as "religions" as well. But according to any definition of "religion" which does not regard Monday Night Football as a 'sacrament' of whatever kind, evolution is not a "religion".
- The argumentation used to support the claim of evolution being a religion is not in question, however the use of the term religion is confused with what would be more agreeably called a ‘world view’. Any system of thought or perceptive will inherently be value laden and supported by various underlying assumptions of metaphysics. Thus while both modern science and Christianity are approaches to explain, interpret, and view existence, they differ in the supports and values on which they rest. While no perfect definition of religion, or science for that matter, is agreed upon, a clear demarcation of the underlying differences between the two generalized approaches can be seen in the questions that are asked. The questions of religion such as: Where do 'we' go when we die? What exists outside of existence? and, Who is God? are not so much unanswerable by science but more inapplicable as the religion’s underlying metaphysical conceptions inherent in such questions are not shared by the scientific perspective. (i.e. Science doesn't think of man, reality, and the purpose of inquiry in the same way as religion.)
- If evolution were a religion, which it is not, it is still compatible and accepted by a very large number of religions.
- Science can only be viewed as a religion insofar as the assertion that the universe is internally consistent is axiomatic. If it isn't internally consistent, it is not necessarily possible to demonstrate that it isn't. If this axiom of science and logical reasoning is wrong, it follows that any and every belief system is a religion, making the above argument disingenuous.
- Science does not accept "revealed truth" as evidence. Because God, Allah, Moses, Buddha, Darwin or (Ernst) Mayr says so does not make it so. They may all propose hypotheses, but then they and others must do the hard work to support or disprove them.
- So if the theory of Evolution is disqualified because it is actually a religion, then, does this mean that Christianity is not a religion and that the Book of Genesis is not a holy text?
- add more responses
Fallacies contained in this claim
- Equivocation ("Values" and "meanings")
- False Dilemma (Assumes one must make a choice between their religious beliefs and evolution)
- Composition (Religions have common values. Therefore religion is "common values". Atheists have values. Therefore atheism is religion.)
External Links
- VonRoeschlaub, Warren Kurt, 1994. God and Evolution, [1]
- Morris, Henry Evolution is Religion, Not Science. Institute for Creation Research.
Further Reading
- Ruse, Michael, 2000 (May 13). Creationists correct?: Darwinians wrongly mix science with morality, politics. National Post.
Related claims
- Evolutionary theory has become sacrosanct
- Evolution requires as much faith as creationism
- Michael Ruse admitted that evolution is a religion
