Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

How dare the people not believe in Darwin?

arroba Email

Cautiously introduced as a “guest voice” in the Washington Post, commentator David Klinghoffer talks about Alfred Russel Wallace, co-theorist of natural selection, as a voice for healing the current social divide between the elite sinless Monkeyman and the traditional popular Adam:

Pro-Darwinian educators were frustrated this week to find that most public high school biology instructors in their teaching do not wholeheartedly endorse evolution. The teachers reflect a stubborn division across American culture. For the past three decades, Americans have been locked into a basically unchanging split of views on the subject, with only about 16 percent believing in Darwin’s theory of unguided evolution.

Darwinism is, at bottom, a theory about us (trousered apes, meat puppets, etc.).

Now, obviously, when the vast majority of people simply do not believe a theory about us imposed from above, and have never believed it, the most likely reason is that we sense it isn’t true. That is how we people become the enemy of the State. We don’t ask for it;  it just happens.

More from Klinghoffer:

His thinking seems more modern in other ways. While Darwin supplied a basis for later pseudo-scientific racism, inspiring eugenic movements in Europe and America, Wallace grew up poor and lived for years with supposedly primitive “Third World” peoples, praising their cultures as in some ways superior to European civilization. Wallace emphasized the dignity of all men and, as a committed socialist, agitated for political freedom and equality.His view is not Biblical literalist creationism, certainly, nor intelligent design — at least as the latter is portrayed by its critics. Professor Flannery calls it “intelligent evolution.”

Well, Wallace was all the good things that Klinghoffer says, and was not – as Klinghoffer observes – in any sense a traditional thinker about spiritual matters. If he were going to be a literalist, he would need to begin by writing his own Scriptures.

But that’s just the trouble. Wallace wouldn’t be any use to the key modernist cause of controlling humans by treating us as animals. Darwin figured that out as quickly as anyone, and told Wallace, re his idea that humans are somehow special,

“I hope you have not murdered too completely your own and my child,”

Okay, I get it. No wonder Darwin is court-enforced and tax-supported, and Wallace is obscure.

Yet somehow, the people (including  me) stupidly refuse to believe in Darwin.

Surely this calls for harsher tactics against the people.

I'd like to know what test is used to determine evolution is or isn't 'unguided' in the relevant sense of the words. 'Random with respect to fitness' won't cut it. nullasalus

Leave a Reply