Snatches of conversation: On Darwinism and Marxism
Talking with a friend, I commented,
"Darwinists are like the Marxists I remember from my youth: For Marxists, the very existence of any social problem was evidence of the need for Marxism. For Darwinists, the very existence of evolution is evidence of the need for Darwinism as the only way to interpret it.
Like Marxists, Darwinists can tolerate no other theory and no other interpretations. And like Marxists, Darwinists have their fellow travellers - people concerned to preserve "the teaching of evolution" in schools - in context, to prevent any evidence-based criticism of Darwinism.
Amazing numbers of these fellow travelers need me to know, for some reason, that they flounce off to church on Sundays - as if I care! They ask me to ignore what I have learned. If their god approves that, well, they go to the right church - for them. But I, thankfully, do not.
My friend replied,
Years ago, during a late night discussion with some Marxist intellectuals, I made the claim that no science is completely objective, i.e., evidence-based, and completely free of subjective elements. Someone in the group disagreed, claiming that there was at least one science that IS completely objective. I asked him what it was. I expected him to say "physics" and I was prepared for that, but his answer left me speechless. "The Marxist view of history, of course," he said with absolute conviction.
If you like this blog, check out my book on the intelligent design controversy, By Design or by Chance?. You can read excerpts as well.
Are you looking for one of the following stories?
A summary of recent opinion columns on the ID controversy
A summary of recent polls of US public opinion on the ID controversy
A summary of the Catholic Church's entry into the controversy, essentially on the side of ID.
O'Leary's intro to non-Darwinian agnostic philosopher David Stove ?
An ID Timeline: The ID folk seem always to win when they lose.
O’Leary’s comments on Francis Beckwith, a Dembski associate, being denied tenure at Baylor.
Why origin of life is such a difficult problem.
Blog policy note:Comments are permitted on this blog, but they are moderated. Fully anonymous posts and URLs posted without comment are rarely accepted. To Mr. Anonymous: I'm not psychic, so if you won't tell me who you are, I can't guess and don't care. To Mr. Nude World (URL): If you can't be bothered telling site visitors why they should go on to your fave site next, why should I post your comment? They're all busy people, like you. To Mr. Rudesby International and Mr. Pottymouth: I also have a tendency to delete comments that are merely offensive. Go be offensive to someone who can smack you a good one upside the head. That may provide you with a needed incentive to stop and think about what you are trying to accomplish. To Mr. Righteous but Wrong: I don't publish comments that contain known or probable factual errors. There's already enough widely repeated misinformation out there, and if you don't have the time to do your homework, I don't either. To those who write to announce that at death I will either 1) disintegrate into nothingness or 2) go to Hell by a fast post, please pester someone else. I am a Catholic in communion with the Church and haven't the time for either village atheism or aimless Jesus-hollering.