Consternation over Carson, Evolution, and Morality

Yesterday, May 14th, almost 500 Emory University faculty and students expressed their dismay that their commencement speaker did not toe the ideological line when it came to evolutionary biology. Yes, gasp, the renowned Johns Hopkins neurosurgeon Ben Carson does not believe in evolutionary theory. Not only that, but biology professors at Emory and their supporters also accuse Carson of committing a thought crime because he allegedly “equates acceptance of evolution with a lack of ethics and morality.”

Since I am a historian who has studied and published on the history of evolutionary ethics, I was rather surprised by the Emory faculties’ consternation over Carson’s belief that evolution undermines objective ethics and morality. Last summer I attended a major interdisciplinary conference at Oxford University on “The Evolution of Morality and the Morality of Evolution.” Thus I am well aware that there are a variety of viewpoints in academe on this topic. Nonetheless, many evolutionists—from Darwin to the present (including quite a few at that Oxford conference)—have argued and are still arguing precisely the point that Dr. Carson was highlighting: they claim that morality has evolved and thus has no objective existence.

One of the keynote speakers at the Oxford conference was the leading philosopher of science Michael Ruse, who stated in a 1985 article co-authored with Harvard biologist E. O. Wilson: “Ethics as we understand it is an illusion fobbed off on us by our genes to get us to co-operate.”

Continue reading at www.credomag.com

« Previous Article

Posting Policy

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse. Read more.

Buck

Ethics , integrity , morality , and honor are all characteristics of Christian values that are being rapidly eliminated as Christianity itself is being intentionally denigrated and eliminated by those that want no restrictions on their most basic animalistic lusts , desires , greed , and matierialism . Anything else is just idiotic blather like the meaning of " is " or more recently the meaning of " the " . Twistying , mangling , and warping language does NOTHING to change anything in reality , only in liberal progressive fantasies needed to justify their mental illness .
- daves
  
  Christianity is not being eliminated, intentionally or not.
  
  This article is confusing. The author argues that Ben Carson and E. O. Wilson both believe that evolution undermines ethics. The author is very mistaken about the correlation because Mr. Carson does not believe in evolution so his belief that it undermines ethics has nothing to do with ethics evolving. Mr. Carson thinks that the belief in evolution undermines ethics not evolution itself.
  
  I also disagree with Mr. Carson that the belief in evolution undermines ethics. I guess Hitler believed that he was speeding up evolution by killing the undesirables in society but most of us who believe in evolution also believe in treating others kindly. Since Mr. Carson is a neurosurgeon, you would think he has heard of mirror neurons.
msjallen

Morality is not spirituality. Spirituality is far greater since we get it from Bible Doctrine. We should take establishment values from Bible Doctrine and apply them to our lives and all other things will fall in place. Morality does not require the filling of the Spirit. Unbelievers can be moral; like living by an honor code in the military. We can’t use morality to measure the Christian way of life; we are to use the Bible. Anything the unbeliever can do is not Christianity and unbelievers can be moral.

Freedom begins with humility taught in the home. Respect for authority in the home. The highest form of integrity is not self absorption, it is the spiritual life learned from Bible Doctrine.
I appreciate doctors like Ben Carson. There are many more like him; I have several and they are very valuable to me.
Evermyrtle

Your spirituality should determine morality.
http://www.lambspoet.blogspot.com Dave Severy

God is spirit. Men and women are souls and are sinners. Because God reigns man's moral condition is judged by His Holy standard. Morality and immorality will be seen in men and women as high or low morale. Those enjoying true joy and peace in God will have good morals and high morale.

Their ethics , integrity , morality , and honor will give glory to God. Those without God (in the Messiah) may have morals, but they will be built on sand. The 500 at Emory are typical of those whose unbelief in God and Jesus has brought them to oppose believes, and oppose God and the Way of Jesus. I think they will be found to have low morale and bad morals. Eventually what is built on sand degenerates to this low level.
- http://N/A Amos Osoro
  
  Heaven is in need of men like you who can not be bought nor be corrupted,but couragiously points the truth!
keyboardshark

"Johnny tries to get through a joke with a little help from his staff." Oh, wait a minute, the article is about Ben Carson, not Johnny Carson. Oh well, watch the clip anyway, it's funny:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embed…!
red nig

what you silly people do not understand is, secularism is always right and never wrong, secularism is always right and never wrong, scularism is always right and never wrong,se cularism is always right and never wrong, cult-arism is always right and never wrong, cularism is always right and never wrong, n-n-ne rrrrrightw-rong-ng….zzzzt—–
keyboardshark

Why do evolutionist believe evolution is true? Because of overwhelming scientific evidence? Guess again.

"Professor Richard Lewontin, a geneticist (and self-proclaimed Marxist), is certainly one of the world’s leaders in evolutionary biology. He wrote this very revealing comment . It illustrates the implicit philosophical bias against Genesis creation—regardless of whether or not the facts support it.

‘We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism.

It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is an absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door." http://creation.com/amazing-admission-lewontin-qu…
- http://dl.dropbox.com/u/22306708/Jn6.37.png Despeville
  
  An oxymoron, atheist believing in evolution and at the same time supporting "gay marriage". :)
  - keyboardshark
    
    Kind of like "government intelligence".
    - http://rationalresponses.blogspot.com/ Jeff Dixon
      
      Government intelligence is an oxymoron. Gay marriage is simply an attempt to give one group of the society a level playing field.
      - keyboardshark
        
        Jeff says: "Gay marriage is simply an attempt to give one group of the society a level playing field."
        
        It already is a level playing field. They have just as much right as anyone else to marry someone of the opposite sex. It is a universal privilege to one and all. But that's not good enough for them. Instead, they want special rights, in an effort to legitimize their sinful lifestyle, plus they want the power to silence anyone who disagrees.
    - http://dl.dropbox.com/u/22306708/Jn6.37.png Despeville
      
      Exactly but more profoundly portrayed in insane inconsistency and shallowness and stupidity of atheists who contradict themselves on every turn. Sadly those inconsistencies and dichotomies of atheistic pro homosexual views does not bother them a single bit :)
  - http://rationalresponses.blogspot.com/ Jeff Dixon
    
    Humpty, I realize that you gave up any semblance of rationality years before today, but this comment is one of your more absurd. I suppose you are trying to equate gay marriage with the continuation of the human species. However, evolution does not rely specific individuals to ensure survival of the species.
    
    Marriage is a social construct, not a biological requirement. Heterosexuals can have children without being married. There is nothing about being married that evolution requires. If marriage was required for a species to continue then all other animals would never reproduce as they do not get married either.
    
    The animal kingdom is a perfect example of other gay interactions. There are hundreds of animals that engage in same sex behaviors, yet that does not prevent them from reproducing as well. http://www.bidstrup.com/sodomy.htm
    
    If you are trying to say that only two people who can have children should be allowed to get married, then we should prohibit all heterosexuals who are incapable of producing children to get married as well.
    
    But as usual, I appreciate your comments for the humor factor. Keep up the good work.
    - http://dl.dropbox.com/u/22306708/Jn6.37.png Despeville
      
      "However, evolution does not rely specific individuals to ensure survival of the species. "
      
      However that above is inane, irrational and dumb assertion and besides the point mumbling based on your straw man for I was not speaking about any "specific individuals"… :)
      Look up at my comment and you will not find it there. That is only your dumb canard of vain assertion and another clumsy straw man you have erected for your feeble, illogical mind. The question is what sexual behavior is consistent and facilitating for your theory of evolution and expansion of "human animals" in it. For any reasonable mind that can only be life producing sex which can happen only between man and woman with outcomes i.e. healthy pregnancy is also most protected and supported in a union in marriage between man and a woman.
      The fact is that life is coming forth only form a union of man and woman and no matter how dumb you want to be you will not change that schizoid Dixon.
      
      'If you are trying to say that only two people who can have children should be allowed to get married, then we should prohibit all heterosexuals who are incapable of producing children to get married as well."
      
      Another dumb irrationality and straw men kicking.Dumboid when will you understand that it is not any " two people who can have children " but two people of OPPOSITE SEX and whether or not this happens is based on so many factors that can change for positive and negative outcomes throughout the lives with one absolutely needed and intrinsic to procreate the parties must be of OPPOSITE SEX. I am sure your wife understands those things despite your utter stupidity and irrationality.
Carmeta

Everyone has an opinion ,people in general wants u to say what they want u to say , not what u believe ,but those same people want then to turn around and say to you what they believe !!!??,!!,!!! How ironic ,!,,',!! They knew before they invited DR. Carson what his believes were. hE BELIEVE IN THE BIBLE. Sooooo what is the problem
bighoss

Weikart's article is a devastating condemnation of the critics of Dr. Carson's speech. It shows just how little many of them actually know concerning the extensive dialogue among evolutionists concerning the origins and purposes of morality and ethics. The knee-jerk critics of Carson betray their own ignorance.
bighoss

For a scholarly analysis of the error inherent in the attempt to apply classic Darwinian evolution to human psychology, see "Alas, Poor Darwin: Arguments Against Evolutionary Psychology:, edited by Hilary Rose and Steven Rose, published by Harmony Books, New York. It is a bit heavy going and technical, but study it carefully and you will be well primed to deal with
the flaws of evolutionary psychology.
E. Ramsay

Dr Carson is a Seventh Day Adventist Christian. Adventists do no believe in evolution or Big Bang theories in any of their exotic flavors. Of course, Evolution and Creation are not compatible in the same argument. I
- http://dl.dropbox.com/u/22306708/Jn6.37.png Despeville
  
  7th Day Adventists have far bigger problems and nuts than this and they are not Christian. Their "Jesus" is a created being and as such cannot save anyone and definitively no Adventist holding to this satanic lie.
  - Angelatarangela
    
    I'm afraid that you are confusing Seventh-day Adventists with Latter-day Saints. The confusion is understandable; they do both have the word 'day' in them, so I'll throw you a bone on that one. However, in actual fact, Adventists believe in exactly the same Jesus as all other mainstream Christians. That is, as stated in the Nicene Creed, "…one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father…Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father;…" I think that should clear things up for you. Next time you choose to bash someone else's belief system, you might want to be certain you actually know what it is.