home | what's new | other sites | contact | about

  

 

Word Gems 

exploring self-realization, sacred personhood, and full humanity

 

The unproven
dogmatic foundations,
the materialistic assumptions,
of Darwinistic biology

 

 

return to "Evolution Controversy" contents page

 

Critics of modern Darwinistic biology charge that it is not a true science, not like chemistry or physics, as it is built upon two major organizing principles, each of which not only is unsubstantiated but conflicts with a massive corpus of research. Darwinistic biology is a philosophical house of straw.

The two major organizing principles of modern Darwinistic biology are:

(1) upward causation, asserting that everything, at core, is made up of "hard little bee-bees" as building-blocks of the universe; it posits that sub-atomic particles, make atomic particles, which make molecules, then amino acids and proteins, DNA and cells, then tissue and organs, upwardly on and on, eventually fleshing out all life, producing complete bodies, including, for humans, not just the brain but consciousness itself, with its feelings of love and joy.

(2) Darwinistic evolution is led, activated, empowered by chance and necessity. Given enough time, “pigs can fly,” all things are possible, no matter how remote the likelihood.

Dr. Amit Goswami, Creative Evolution:

Upward causation: “All biological phenomena arise from the interaction of microscopic constituents of matter called molecules (and ultimately from the interactions of subatomic particles called elementary particles). This principle assumes a molecular basis of life, the idea that life can be reduced to the movement of molecules… In biology, the dogma of upward causation is expressed as genetic determinism: Genes determine all biological form and function.”

Chance and necessity: “This principle… forms the basis of the evolutionary model called Darwinism… that is accepted, explicitly or implicitly, by most biologists. According to the latest version of Darwinism, evolution proceeds in two stages. The first stage is the chance production of variations in the hereditary components of life [i.e., the genes]. The second stage is selection from among these variations, dictated by the necessities of survival for species coping with changes in the natural environment. This process is called natural selection. The genetic changes that cause the beneficial chance variations occur rarely, but working over millions of years this slow, two-step Darwinian mechanism accounts for all facets of evolution, according to most biologists.”

Dr. Amit Goswami, Creative Evolution: “[Scientific materialism asserts:] Elementary particles make atoms, atoms make molecules, molecules make living cells with those all-powerful genes, some of the living cells (guided by the genes) make the brain, and the brain makes all subjective experiences, such as consciousness, thoughts, feelings, and so on. Cause rises upward from the elementary particles, and all causation is upward causation… Can you really believe that all your thoughts and meanings, your feelings and struggles with values, and indeed your consciousness itself, are the results of a random dance of elementary particles of genetic determinism? that you are a purely ornamental epiphenomenon, a secondary consequence of the random movement of matter in your brain cells? Even the scientific proponents of purely upward causation don’t really believe that! If they themselves are merely causally impotent epiphenomena, why do they take themselves and their ideas so seriously?”

 

give us one free miracle, and we'll explain the rest

Dr. Rupert Sheldrake: "As my friend Terence McKenna used to say, modern science is based on the principle, 'Give us one free miracle, and we'll explain the rest'. And the one free miracle is the appearance of all the matter and energy in the universe, and all the laws that govern it, from nothing, in a single instant."

what can’t you believe

In the Sheldrake / Abraham / McKenna Trialogues, that took place between 1989 and 1998, the latter participant, Terrence McKenna, also irreverently asserted, to the effect, “If you can believe that all the energy and matter, everything that you see around you, came into existence from nothing in a hot nano-second, then – what can’t you believe?”

Yes – “what can’t you believe?” At times we find ourselves so mesmerized by group mindset and materialist propaganda that we robotically agree to whatever is spoon fed to us; we uncritically accept it, gulp it down like water.

Something-from-nothing is a “religious doctrine” of holy materialism, to be endorsed as a matter of faith. There’s no rational argument for it, but is simply required by the theory to offer semblance of coherency in a spirit of “the joker is wild.” There are, however, more credible cosmogonical explanations.

 

 

three perennial mysteries for which Darwinism has no answer

Dr. Amit Goswami, Creative Evolution:

“Every biologist must be painfully aware that biology is an incomplete science. It needs new organizing principles, ones that are nonphysical and nonmaterial, to explain three perennial mysteries:

  1. the difference between life and nonlife (Davies 1988),
  2. the development of an embryo into an adult biological form (Sheldrake 1981),
  3. the discontinuous epochs of evolution.

“Unfortunately, it is not politically correct for a biologist to admit these shortcomings in public…”

 

 

Editor's last word:

“Unfortunately, it is not politically correct for a biologist to admit these shortcomings in public…”

Political correctness is a form of censorship, like a religious guru withholding nihil obstat ["nothing hinders"] and imprimatur ["let it be printed"].

It means that your philosophical position is so weak on the merits of the case that it couldn’t survive the naked light of day, a full-discussion hearing in an open forum.

And so you go for suppression and thought-control. You attempt to block, ridicule, and marginalize the objections of others.

truth will out

It's strange, actually. Those who do this have no sense of history. There's no chance of this working, long term. Can anyone point to a single example of disinformation campaign, in previous centuries, wherein “The Lying Teacher” has not eventually been exposed in his fake-news efforts?

As Shakespeare warns in The Merchant of Venice, “truth will come to light; murder cannot be hid long; a man's son may, but at the length truth will out.”