Fear of Evolution

Christians sorted it out by deciding that evolution and natural selection were mere mechanisms of God's will. What will the left do?
Evolutionary biology has always been controversial. Not controversial among biologists, but controversial among the general public.... The philosopher Daniel Dennett has described evolution as a sort of “universal acid” that “eats through just about every traditional concept, and leaves in its wake a revolutionized world-view, with most of the old landmarks still recognizable, but transformed in fundamental ways.” Fearing this corrosive idea, opposition in the US to evolution mainly came from Right-wing evangelical Christians who believed God created life in its present form, as described in Genesis....

At first, left-wing pushback to evolution appeared largely in response to the field of human evolutionary psychology. Since Darwin, scientists have successfully applied evolutionary principles to understand the behavior of animals, often with regard to sex differences. However, when scientists began applying their knowledge of the evolutionary underpinnings of animal behavior to humans, the advancing universal acid began to threaten beliefs held sacrosanct by the Left. The group that most fervently opposed, and still opposes, evolutionary explanations for behavioral sex differences in humans were/are social justice activists. Evolutionary explanations for human behavior challenge their a priori commitment to “Blank Slate” psychology—the belief that male and female brains in humans start out identical and that all behavior, sex-linked or otherwise, is entirely the result of differences in socialization.
I'll leave the rest of it to those of you who are grabbed by the problem.


Christopher B said...

The Left could sort it out, I think, by affirmation of the intrinsic worth of each human being, and the development of each individual's potential. I'm afraid, however, they are so wedded to Marxian therories that enable their power lust that they can't give up identity politics and enforced equal outcomes.

Texan99 said...

This is how I've always thought of natural laws, from evolution to natural selection to the laws of motion and quantum mechanics. Why would anyone think belief in God was incompatible with noticing regularity and order, as well as chance and probability, in the behavior of the material universe? Whatever faith consists of, I'm sure it doesn't require closing my eyes to facts. Whatever science is about, it certainly doesn't require a belief in any particular system of why.

David Foster said...

"Whatever science is about, it certainly doesn't require a belief in any particular system of why."

But that is precisely what many of the people who talk & post about their love for Science *do* believe...indeed, not even a belief in any particular *system*, but belief in specific assertions that they regard as conclusions of Science. What they are really doing is adopting conclusions based on Authority, and calling it Science.

As an example: There has been much (appropriate) mockery of the people who believe in a Flat Earth. But how many of the mockers can go beyond denouncing the "anti-Science" beliefs of the flat-earthers, and provide a credible explanation of *how* they know the earth is round, and how they would support that conclusion absent airplanes and photos from space.

The motto of the British Royal Society, adopted circa 1633, is 'Nullius in Verba," which means "Take nobody's word for it." This spirit is totally missing from many of those who today proclaim their love for Science.

Assistant Village Idiot said...

I am very much on the genetic-and-evolution side of this. When I claim that genetics, incentives, and random unknown factors explain nearly all human behavior, I am only slightly exaggerating. I am well aware that this is unpopular on the right as well as the left, though the right has different environmental factors they believe are key. I will say again, show me something that is causal rather than correlation.

I don't think people realise how extreme this has become on the academic and SJW left, not only in what they believe themselves, but on what they insist others believe. They really do believe, as in the quoted section, that behavior is entirely the result of socialisation. That is what is in play when people try to refuse a platform to the likes of Charles Murray. Murray does not claim it's all genetics, just that a lot of it is. He is considered something of a squish in the scientific HBD community. (Though he is cut some slack because of the heat he has taken for so long.)

Most people, even most liberals, will declare a "some of each" opinion, which they think is just the obvious answer from living in this world. While there is lip service given to that being allowed, especially in such things as musical or athletic ability, when specific abilities or attitudes are shown to differ along unpopular lines - by sex, by race, by ethnic group - the results are immediately denied and the speakers or researchers attacked.

Cultural differences create differences in mating patterns, and we now know this can change the genetic mix much more quickly than we previously believed. Evolution of the whole organism is slow, but selected traits can be selected for in extreme circumstances very quickly, like even a few centuries.

David Foster said...

There are no prototypes in nature for the absolute blank-slate theory: a wolf or a dog or a horse or a bird clearly has a considerable degree of wired-in behavior. There were also no mechanical prototypes for the theory, prior to the invention of general-purpose computers in the 1940s. But blank-slate theory, even in strong form, long predates this.

So where did people get the idea from?...in recent years, it probably has much to do with a political worldview, but I'm pretty sure that John Locke wasn't an SJW or a socialist.

Texan99 said...

Humans also have an unprecedented ability to alter themselves via the cerebral cortex and culture, so animal studies don't really get to the heart of the problem. Still, the fact that we have the ability to add and alter is not the same as claiming that we're not starting from any kind of substrate whatever.

Ymarsakar said...

Evolutionary biology, even by Darwin's own theoretical standards, is a dead end path. It has about the same evidence as Satan Clause.

Ymarsakar said...

how they would support that conclusion absent airplanes and photos from space.

Air Planes function on a fixed, stationary plane, including gyroscope space fixing.

This is why a lot of physicists and other weird scientific bozos like Kelvin, thought aerospace was a mythical dead end research task. What people know as "air lift" and other properties, is not exactly well understood. Much like the theory of gravity where Neil Disgrace Tyson says scientist boys like him don't actually know what it is. But the public knows to trust in scientific lab coat priests in what gravity is. They read about it in their textbooks after all.

So did brainwashed Leftists, Demoncrats, and Marxist totalitarians, but people don't want to think about that, how brainwashing often starts with literature.

As for photos from space, those are Space Art, not photos. Every alleged photo of Earth from space is an artistic composite. It's called photoshop. Back before photoshop, they had other methods but it wasn't good enough, so they only took one doctored shoot. The actual doctoring was also caught on tape. So who doctored the doctored tape about them doctoring the Apollo shoot of the earth from half way to moon?

Photos from Space from NASA is literally from a cabal of secret deep space Nazi scientists from Operation paperclip that entered the country illegally and without Presidential authorization. That's your "photographic evidence" right there.

Read Orwell's article on Flat Earth and how people know the Earth is a sphere. People have not done their homework. Why would they, fake news and Demoncrats think for them, all they have to do is to Hear the President and OBEY THE PRESIDENT Hussein. That's it Americans. All you need to know and all you need to do is to Obey what you are told.

Ymarsakar said...

American President Hussein actually mentioned the Flat Earth society numerous times.

Kerry and some random other religious leaders also went visiting Antarctica near the Presidential US elections.

This is why Leftists went anti Flat Earth very early on when social media caught wind of the movement. This time, Leftists have to be right, right?