It's widely believed that Charles Darwin lost his faith when he discovered evolution. And many contemporary atheists proclaim themselves followers of Darwin in this sense. Michael Shermer, for instance, writes that he abandoned Christianity when he learned about evolution; finally he could see how there could be design--or the appearance of design--without a designer. Richard Dawkins writes that it was Darwin who finally made it possible to be an "intellectually fulfilled atheist."
In reality Darwin's atheism had little to do with his discovery of evolution. First of all Darwin was never a very devout Christian. He was raised as a nominal Anglican. It says something about Anglicanism in Britain that a lukewarm Christian like Darwin actually considered becoming a clergyman. What turned Darwin against Christianity, however, was two things.
First, several of his children either died or has chronic illnesses. This was probably heriditary, as Darwin himself suffered for most of his life from one ailment or the other. When Darwin's daughter Annie died at a young age, however, Darwin was inconsolable. Usually a man of the stiff upper lip, Darwin could not stop himself from weeping even in public. Darwin blamed God for Annie's untimely death. This was several years before Darwin published his Origin of Species.
After Annie's death, Darwin began to reflect morbidly on mortality, and during his process he recalled that his own famous grandfather Erasmus Darwin, as well as several other family members and friends, were unbelievers. Since Darwin saw them as good and respectable people, he angrily fulminated against the doctrine of eternal damnation, asking what kind of a God would consign good people to hell just because they refused to accept Christianity? The thought of all these people in hell filled Darwin with such revulsion that he completely jettisoned Christianity.
At the same time Darwin recognized that his theory of evolution was quite compatible with Christianity. When the American biologist Asa Gray wrote Darwin to say that his theory of evolution demonstrated how God created species, Darwin congratulated Gray for being the first one to see the point. In England, the preacher-poet Charles Kingsley argued for the compatibility with evolution and Christianity, and Darwin encouraged his efforts.
True, evolution is inconsistent with the six-day account of creation, but since the earliest days of Christianity, Christian writers like Augustine have had no problem with interpreting the first book of Genesis allegorically. After all the Hebrew word can mean "day" but it can also mean "period" or "epoch." Only a small segment of Christians--mostly fundamentalists--are uncompromisingly wedded to the six-day account.
Evolution, however, says nothing about who or what created the universe. Evolution doesn't even say anything about how life got started. Evolution merely describes how one life form gave rise to another. Somewhat comically writers like Dawkins and Daniel Dennett argue that evolution is a kind of master key that unlocks the universe. It isn't hard to see that atheism is getting in the way of clear reasoning here. If you doubt this, go to Youtube and watch again my debate with Daniel Dennett. Unfortunately I cannot also direct you to my debate with Dawkins, since Timorous Richard doesn't want to get into the arena with me.
Darwin lost his faith over the "problem of evil," an issue that has been coming up in my recent debates, and one that I intend to address in future blog postings. It's time to set at rest, however, the old myth that evolution is a scientific refutation of theism in general or Christianity in particular. Darwin himself knew it was not so, even if his dimmer acolytes haven't figured that out yet.
Reader Comments ( Page 4 of 86)
46. GHBrian, where are the footnotes, where are the citations from previous blog pages?
JefFlyingV at 10:41AM on May 5th 2008
47. Yes it is, mokele...
I've heard it analogized as Indra's Net...
+++++++++++++
Far away in the heavenly abode of the great god Indra, there is a wonderful net which has been hung by some cunning artificer in such a manner that it stretches out infintely in all directions. In accordance with the extravagant tastes of deities, the artificer has hung a single glittering jewel in each "eye" of the net, and since the net itself is infinite in dimension, the jewels are infinite in number. There hang the jewels, glittering like stars in the first magnitude, a wonderful sight to behold. If we now arbitrarily select one of these jewels for inspection and look closely at it, we will discover that in its polished surface there are reflected all the other jewels in the net, infinite in number. Not only that, but each of the jewels reflected in this one jewel is also reflecting all the other jewels, so that there is an infinite reflecting process occurring.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indra%27s_net
++++
Also the concept of maya is a useful one:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maya_%28illusion%29
++++
But I've often thought is it in a similar way to your view there. That we're God's senses, and God (the central intelligence, if that's even the case) experiences it all through is. But I tend to lean more toward the idea that we are god, in the sense that we are the creators of all this. So no central intellignece, except that, when we die, we return to gestalt intelligence, as in, our viewpoint goes from the "I" to the "We"..... See, we have the "we" viewpoint already, but only in our deepest cubconscoius mind, which is shared by all of us. It's more of a "group I" rather than a "we" come to think of it. So when we LOSE our overlay of personal identity at death, what's left to us is that group mind. And from it, new beings come into manifestation, so one would think that we (group I) must in some way get to contribute to the new manifestations. To call it central seems wrong, since it's everywhere. But come to think of it, "everywhere," as in the entire known universe, is quite possibly maya or illusion, and space doesn't really exist either, so perhaps to even speak of "everywhere" is a mistake. Two correllated particles can become entwined and transcend all distance in their reactions to the spin changes of the other. If distance itself is an illusion, that's easily explained.
Do you have brain cramps yet?
Godless Heathen Brian at 10:53AM on May 5th 2008
48. 47. GHBrian, where are the footnotes, where are the citations from previous blog pages?
JefFlyingV at 10:41AM on May 5th 2008
---------------------
Not sure what you mean, jeff. On the previous blog I added a bunch of NEW posts at the end that I wrote today, but they're back there.
Godless Heathen Brian at 10:57AM on May 5th 2008
49. This Just In........ And it doth suck profusely.
10,000 dead in Myanmar. Another 3000 missing. Cyclone.
I am heartbroken here. So sad. Seriously. This sucks.
I guess you christians can pray for their souls, but they're probably all buddhists, and you KNOW where THEY go...
Hey... Where DO Buddhists go in Christian theology? Tell me not to hell... If you really believe all these people are going straight to hell, or that Myanmar deserved this somehow for it's "sins..." I'll retch all over my keyboard, I swear I will...
Godless Heathen Brian at 11:03AM on May 5th 2008
50. Excerpt from the "MAYA ILLUSION" page, link posted above...
The goal of enlightenment is to understand this — more precisely, to experience this: to see intuitively that the distinction between the self and the Universe is a false dichotomy. The distinction between consciousness and physical matter, between mind and body (refer bodymind), is the result of an unenlightened perspective.
Godless Heathen Brian at 11:09AM on May 5th 2008
51. Its amazing how much time and energy people spend on hating and critcizing others beliefs or lifestyles. This world is big enough for all of us.Lets start behaving like human beings for a change.This world would be CHOAS without basic order
or respect for life. That comes from tradition, mainly religion. Whatever you call yourselves,
atheist, theist, christians, jews, buddist, we all
follow some form of higher standard. Keep it real.
somegirl at 11:13AM on May 5th 2008
52. "Its amazing how much time and energy people spend on hating and critcizing others beliefs or lifestyles. "
Yeah, Maybe it should be budgeted to 20 min a day. It still has to get done. You'll know what I mean if you pay attention to the things people believe.
Mokele Mbembe at 11:22AM on May 5th 2008
53. e.g. If you beat a little kid up, the central consciousness feels the kid's embarrassment and your asshole sense of superiority at the same time.
-----------------------
Well, I guess you're thinking of the central consciousness like I do the "Group 'I'"
Because I've had this same thought, only it was a murder I was thinking of as an example. So the group mind experiences both the terror of the victim and the twisted zeal of the maniac killing him. Yes. That seems right.
It is even possible that the group mind experiences time very differently. Perhaps all at once, even. So it can experience your birth, first orgasm, and death all at once. Irrelevant of whether the last part has even happened yet here. Since time is also an illusion, a necessary one for us to have experiences in this 'matter-energy' format. Experiences as solid beings, I mean.
Godless Heathen Brian at 11:23AM on May 5th 2008
54. It is very difficult to read some of the stuff people write here. It is weird how people can consider anything DD says as a total insult to atheists but have no problem with calling him all sorts of colorful adjectives in the same breath. The language of hate is cussing, and if you think cuss words add any intellectual hight to a conversation maybe you haven't been around non-educated people lately. But cuss words are all they use in order to express their frustrations. It has nothing to do with freedom of speech. Just becuase you are free to do something, that doesn't mean it is appropiate for every occasion.
Most of the atheists who write comments to this blog only know some theological perspectives some barely know any. But, many are just blatently not interested in knowing anything other than what they know now. When people aren't interested in listening and only interested in hearing the sound of their own ideas (or reading their own words) you will get the contradictions that we see all the time on this blog. How is it possible to call DD hateful and in the same breath call him D'idiot! Hmmm. If indeed DD is hateful I can tell you he is not alone.
I have been reading this blog almost daily for the past year and what I have seen is a bunch of people who think they are intellectuals just because they dont believe in God and know what a Strawman argument is by definition (but maybe not in practice). To say things like "DD is not considered a scholar" is totaly out of line considering that ever other scholar considers him worthy of debate (except of course Dawkins). Also it is important to understand that just because your not in agreement with someones opinion that doesn't make the other a liar. Please remember that the way we process information and believe in concepts is not understood by everyone. You can process all sorts of stuff and never believe in any of it but you will only believe in that which has influenced your life. And influence requieres some degree of relationship. That means that your beliefs are never totally rational but are based also on the type of relationships you have and the emotions you are experiencing when you receive the information. As an example: If a policeman were to show up at my door at 8:00 AM to tell me that he wants to arrest my wife because she killed 3 people last night, I would tell him he is making a mistake. If that officer were to show me evidence that "proves" that my wife was the killer, I still wouldn't believe him. If the policeman were to ask me why I didn't believe him over my wife I would tell him that the relationship I have with my wife gives me a unique perspective, and that perspective let's me know that my wife couldn't have killed those people. Now, I could be wrong about the murders, but my perspective on the situation will never be the same as those who are looking at the situation as cold hard facts.
Everybody who writes on this blog has a vested interest to some degree in seeing their belief prosper in some form. This makes us all parcial and doubtful when it comes to listening to someone who doesn't share our same beliefs. The only way any of us will ever make a dent in the belief system of one another is to treat each other with respect and dignity. Even if we aren't in agreement we can still be cordial and at the end of the day some of us might even wind up becoming friends who disagree. That's much better than wasting our time trying to convince each other that the other point of view is pointless and stupid.
shiningstarxport at 11:26AM on May 5th 2008
55. GHB.....you should watch "What the BLEEP" if you haven't already....definitely supports the "we are one" theory
Strados at 11:38AM on May 5th 2008
56. Every time I hear someone using the archaic and childish word "cussing" I think of Leave It To Beaver. "Gee Wally, dad said that we shouldn't cuss..."
I won't "cuss" in your church if you don't pontificate on my blog... You're not my father. You act like my mother, but you're not her either. So, do I really have to tell you what I think of your attitude? Just read the blog and post, don't appoint yourself policeman.
Godless Heathen Brian at 11:39AM on May 5th 2008
57. Actually, EVERYONE should watch that movie if they haven't already.
Strados at 11:40AM on May 5th 2008
58. GHB- actually my high school students use the word cuss all the time....it's probably turned into an urban thing
Strados at 11:41AM on May 5th 2008
59. 56. GHB.....you should watch "What the BLEEP" if you haven't already....definitely supports the "we are one" theory
Strados at 11:38AM on May 5th 2008
-------------------
Funny you should mention that, strados. I posted this earlier today on the previous DD blog:
+++++++++++++++++++++++
601. Another one I like to tell is the Candace Pert story.
She was in this movie "What the Bleep Do We Know?"
The movie is ABOUT precisely this type of "Big Mind" speculation in the first place. So it's really a double coincidence.
So I'm watching it one night with my wife, and see this neuroscientist, Candace Pert, give a lecture in the movie about neuropeptides and their role in brain chemistry and how they influence the body.
Next day I bring my mom and her sister, my Aunt Marie, to the hospital. Aunt Marie needed a small outpatient procedure. (she's fine)
So I get to the waiting room in a hospital that I'd never been in before. I have some time to kill. I look around at the magazines laying about the room. I see a few smithsonians amongst the Good Housekeepings and Woman's Days. I pick one up. I thumb through it and STOP at a familiar face.
Candace Pert. There's an article in that very Smithsonian by her, all about neuropeptides. Very similar to what I'd heard her say just the previous night in the movie.
Here's the kicker.
The copy of the Smithsonian that I picked up that day in the waiting room was sixteen years old. Someone must have brought it in from their home.
(I actually stole it and still have it as a keepsake)
Sixteen Years Old. But with Candace Pert in it for me to find.
Goddess, are THESE the type of coincidences that you're thinking of, that we all get but just don't notice? Because I'd say that I'd CERTAINLY have noticed ANY of these before I started getting them seven years or so ago.
And I've got many, many more... Too many to count. The time I was thinking about tiramisu in a restaurant while my wife was in the restroom. When she got back I told her that I'd been wanting tiramisu but didn't order it because I didn't need the calories and we were on a tight budget anyhow. I just got through telling her this, no more than twenty seconds go by, and the woman bartender walks over to where we were sitting, puts a slice of tiramisu in front of ME and says "Do either of you want this? It's the last piece and we need to get rid of it or it'll go bad by tomorrow..." She hadn't even been around for my conversation with my wife, either.
Godless Heathen Brian at 7:59AM on May 5th 2008
+++++++++++++++++++
Godless Heathen Brian at 11:42AM on May 5th 2008
60. shiningstarxport will be quickly forgotten.
I can swear a cuss real good.
Mokele Mbembe at 11:46AM on May 5th 2008