The currently active thread,
"Teacher Fired for Disagreeing With Literal Interpretation of Bible", has had some trouble in staying on its intended topic. It has been suggested that some of the side topics be spun off into their own threads.
One of the topics that was being discussed was the issue of whether the theory of evolution is inherently racist. There were several posts generated by this: here is a link to
the last post before the admin off-topic warning.
This OP isn't intended to be a direct response to that post
per se. What I propose is to discuss the moral, social, and philosophical implications of the theory of evolution, and whether there are any such implications.
It is my position that there are no moral, social, or philosophical implications to the theory of evolution. The theory of evolution is simply a description of observable phenomena, and the use of those phenomena to explain other observable phenomena.
The theory of evolution simply states the following:
(1) The individuals in a population vary in the physical characteristics.
(2) These differences in physical characteristics are hereditary.
(3) Some individuals in the population will produce many offspring, some will produce few offspring, and some will produce none at all.
(4) This difference in reproductive success is often determined by the inheritable physical characteristics.
(5) Therefore, as a conclusion, the next generation will have more individuals with the characteristics associated with reproductive success, and few individuals with the characteristics associated with fewer individuals.
(6) Eventually, provided there is no source of the less productive characteristics, the entire population will consist of individuals having only the successful characteristics, and none of the others.
This phenomenon is called
natural selection. As far as I know, with few exceptions, no one really disputes the existence of natural selection.
The theory of evolution postulates another statement:
(7) New variations of physical characteristics will appear in a population, and these new variations will often be hereditary.
This, too, is an observation. This, too, is a fact. Under our current understanding in the heredity of physical characteristics, we call these new variations
genetic mutations.
Finally, the theory of evolution makes one more statement:
(8) All known species are the result of the modification of populations of organisms by processes (1) through (7) over a long period of time, starting with a single ancestral population.
This is the part that is under dispute by creationists. Now whether (8) is an accurate description of reality or not is not the subject of this thread. The point made here is that, like the others, (8) is simply a description of a phenomenon, called
common descent; it is simply a proposed description of history, and is a simple, objective fact that is either true or not true.
None of the statements (1) through (8), either individually or together, imply any moral, social, or philosophical positions.
Now, it is true that one may use the theory of evolution to inform one's moral or social beliefs. For example, if one's ethics is heavily based on Genesis bring literal history, and if the theory of evolution is the correct description of reality, then one is obliged to rethink one's moral positions. But the theory of evolution doesn't promotes any particular ethics or philosophy.
It is also true that any individual may use the theory of evolution to develop a philosophical framework, but there is nothing in evolution that will produce any particular direction in philosophy -- that will be the result of the idiosyncracies of that particular person's beliefs. Futhermore, the theory of evolution doesn't even force a person to use it as part of her philosophical framework; whatever the person's philosophy or religion, the theory of evolution may simply be regarded as a true fact without any further implications for that person's philosophical outlook.
I think this sums up my view of the matter. If this thread is promoted, I think "Miscellaneous Topics in Creation/Evolution" would be the best place for it, although "Social Issues and Creation/Evolution" would be appropriate as well.
If it's truly good and powerful, it deserves to engender a thousand misunderstandings. -- Ben Ratcliffe
™ Version 4.2