the decent of western thought

How did we get into this post-modern predicament? (Gleaned from the work of Francis Schaeffer)

desire for control & need for irrational leaps

Starting with and sticking with oneself creates an illusion of control but ends in despair. To escape the logical consequences of this course, one is compelled to make irrational leaps to get above the "line of despair" such as falling in love, taking on a cause, or similar acts in the hope of securing meaning and purpose for one's life.

Unfortunately, these leaps of faith cannot be sustained and one falls back into despair. It is not possible to escape this cycle of despair apart from outside intervention.

While this has always been the human condition, it is now reinforced by post-modern worldviews. So, it's now common place for those who embrace worldviews such as secular humanism and naturalism to engage in irrational leaps of faith to escape the logical consequence of their post-modern worldview - despair.

To keep from falling back into despair, one must refrain from reflecting or thinking too deeply about the inconsistency of each leap. An avoidance mechanism that is often employed is to setup an endless stream of distractions.

Lasting hope is not an option within such a closed system that precludes assistance outside ourselves.

Secular Humanism - what and so what?

What is it and why does it matter? Am I serious about taking on such a serious topic?! Where's the humor and where's the fun? Well... not in this blog!

Secular humanism is a humanist philosophy that upholds reason, ethics, and justice, and specifically rejects the supernatural and the spiritual as warrants of moral reflection and decision-making. Like other types of humanism, secular humanism is a life stance or a praxis focusing on the way human beings can lead good and happy lives (eupraxsophy). The term was coined in the 20th century to make a clear distinction from "religious humanism". A related concept is scientific humanism, which the biologist Edward O. Wilson claimed to be "the only worldview compatible with science's growing knowledge of the real world and the laws of nature". Wikipedia 2007

“Man is the measure of all things” and objective truth is not possible. Protagoras 460 b.c.
“You will be like God”, The Serpent

There are consequences of such a worldview as outlined below.

"Foisting the democratic “form-freedom balance in government downward on cultures whose philosophy and religion would never have produced it, has, in almost every case, ended in some form of totalitarianism…” The humanists push for “freedom” but having no Christian consensus to contain it, that “freedom” leads to chaos or to slavery under the state. Humanism, with its lack of any final base for values or law, always leads to chaos. It then naturally leads to some form of authoritarianism to control the chaos… With its mistaken concept of final reality, it has no intrinsic reason to be interested in the individual, the human being. Its natural interest is the two collectives: the state and society.”
A Christian Manifesto by Francis Schaeffer, pg. 30.

scientific material worldview - what is it?

The following from E. O. Wilson's book, On Human Nature :

“The view that all phenomena in the universe, including the human mind, have a material basis, are subject to the same physical laws, and can be understood by scientific analysis.” pg. 230.

“The core of scientific materialism is the evolutionary epic… the laws of the physical sciences, are consistent with those of the biological and social sciences and can be linked in chains of causal explanation; that life and mind have a physical basis… When scientists project physical processes backward… with the aid of mathematical models they are talking about everything – literally everything…” pp 208-209.

Darwinism and naturalism are related post-modern worldviews. William Provine, a biologist at Cornell University, insists that Darwinism is more than the mechanics of evolution, it's a comprehensive philosophy. To be consistent, Darwinism means: "No life after death; no ultimate foundation for ethics; no ultimate meaning for life; no free will."

What do you think? Another point of view?

evolution - theory, fact, or something else?

Darwinian evolution has three main components: random mutations (variation), natural selection (selection), and common ancestry (inheritance).

Today, evolutionary theory has two parts: 1. the mechanisms that make it possible (Darwinian evolution), and, 2. a scientific material worldview that acts as a lens for interpreting the evidence. While it may appear intuitively obvious that evolution explains physical reality, it's also surprising that the scientific evidence doesn't line up as one would expect. Moreover, adopting a worldview anchored in evolution creates difficult philosophical problems.

Problems with evidence:

• The fossil record is the “biggest problem” (pg. 323 Origin of Species, C. Darwin). Punctuated equilibrium is a complex explanation.
• Lack of evidence from the natural world for macro or vertical evolution. No evidence for essential steps such protein to protein interactions based on random mutations and natural selection.
  
• The mathematics of adaptive vs deleterious mutations do not add up to account for complex structures
  
• Difficult to explain complex design with serial assembly ("Most of the mutations that built the great structures of life must have been nonrandom." Michael Behe)
• 2nd Law of Thermodynamics – entropy
• Limited or no ability to apply scientific method (e.g., observation, repeatability, falsifiable)

Philosophical problems include:

• No basis for morality: If evolution explains all of reality then there is no evil, moral accountability or judgment
• No objective and consistent basis for values of any kind
  
• No intrinsic value for human beings
  
• No basis for the equality of human beings
• No answer to fear of death, non-being, the impersonal, dread, or existential angst
• No satisfactory explanations for evil, love, guilt, pain and suffering, or our need to hide and control
  
• No answers to our need for rest, forgiveness, freedom, and ultimate personal relationship
  
• No means by which we can be saved from ourselves (e.g., pride, selfishness, self-delusion)
• No meaning and purpose
• No ultimate destiny

In fact, in a debate (with Phillip Johnson on April 30, 1994 at Stanford University) Dr. William Provine as an evolutionary naturalist, rightly concluded that there are: no gods or purposive forces, no ultimate foundation for ethics, no free will, no life after death, and no ultimate meaning in life. Those are some of the logical conclusions of evolutionary naturalism.

Evidence for evolution:

• adaptation - horizontal change within species in response to environmental conditions (e.g., finch beaks, moth coloring)
• micro-evolution (e.g., sickle cell and other adaptations to malaria, HIV adaptations to drugs, E. Coli adaptations to anti-biotics)
• gene sequencing points strongly to common decent
  

Reasonable explanations:

• Evolutionary theory in its current state is incomplete and/or has mistaken assumptions
• Some type of intelligent design is involved

The evolutionary worldview dictates that reality is bound by the uniform laws of cause and effort in a closed system. Humanity and God are part of the cosmic machinery. Embracing this worldview has logical consequences that one cannot escape without illogical leaps of faith.

Over the last hundred years unimaginable brutality and death came by way of non-theistic religions. These religions were based in post-modern worldviews that sprang from evolutionary naturalism. Some of the leaders of these religions include: Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Mao Tse-tung, and Pol Pot.

In fact, Hitler's "final solution" to the Jewish "problem" was grounded in the naturalistic philosophy of "survival of the fittest". Of Christianity, Hitler said, " I shall never come to terms with the Christian lie." and "Our epoch will certainly see the end of the disease of Christianity." Hitler's thinking was also strongly influenced by Nietzsche and his ideas of "will to power" and uber-man. Hitler's use of ideas from Nietzsche and Darwin turned out to be a deadly combination.

A Biblical worldview also supports the uniformity of cause and effect. However, this system is open and permits humanity and God being outside the system.

Other views, opposed or different?