Essence of Darwinism, The

Some really good stuff; pity about the conclusions and Epilogue.

 MAIN BODY OF BOOK
<BR>
<BR>Chapters 1-18 comprise the main analysis in the book, basically containing historical and factual information, followed by more philosophical arguments, looking at why evolution has always been associated with religion and religious arguments, and I found a lot in these chapters to be really helpful and informative. Also, the writing is clear.
<BR>
<BR>On the whole, these chapters take and present evolution simply just as it is presented by the scientific community today, with the typical blurring of the lines between what is fact and what is hypothesis. I think it would have been extremely helpful to have dug slightly deeper. One way this could have been done is by drawing the distinction between day-to-day natural selection and species change on the one hand, and long-term molecules to man evolution on the other - which is the huge and very real difference between the empirical practical real science of what happens today, and the extrapolation back over the millions of years which people are unable to observe.
<BR>
<BR>I think this omission also leads to some confusion, with statements scattered throughout the book that, as they stand, appear to be patently false and rather naïve, such as ‘Evolutionary theory just talks about what is.’ (p.114). It is only by grasping this distinction that what Kirsten Birkett means can be understood.
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>EPILOGUE
<BR>
<BR>At the end comes the Epilogue, which seeks to explain how the Bible relates to all this. Birkett considers what can be learnt from Genesis 1-2, considering the form, the genre, and what it means to read the Bible literally, and draws the conclusion that "It would seem to be poor reading to claim that Genesis 1-2 is making particular scientific-style claims about the time frame and exact mechanistic detail by which God created the world and humanity," (p. 138). She also concludes that the aim of the Bible is different to the aim of evolution; evolution answers how we got here, but the Bible answers questions such as why we’re here, and why we’re as we are. Therefore, "Evolution is not an explanation of the world which challenges the Biblical explanation of the world," (p. 140), and so, she concludes, the two are compatible.
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>The omission of the clear distinction between day-to-day natural selection and long-term molecules to man evolution is serious here, as the Bible has basically nothing to say about natural selection, but it definitely does make comments that may well apply to our beliefs about millions of years molecules to man evolution. Therefore, to put all of ‘evolution’ under one umbrella to consider it in relation to the Bible must be incorrect.
<BR>
<BR>Also, in the Epilogue: there’s no mention or analysis of the Hebrew, or quotes from Hebrew scholars, as to what message the writer of Genesis 1-2 is trying to convey. There’s no consideration whatsoever of any logical implications of either belief, eg. millions of years means death before Adam, (see I Cor 15v21). There’s no mention whatsoever of any other Bible passages, such as Exodus 31v15-17 or Mark 10v6. There’s no mention of the fact that millions of years is not a thought that you can get anywhere from the Bible, as opposed to other ideas. And there’s no mention of what have historically been the prevailing views of the Christian church for the past millennia.
<BR>
<BR>All of which means it’s unsurprising that she reaches the conclusions she does regarding Genesis 1-2 and the aim of the Bible in this area. Which I think have to be regarded as simply wrong when the factors mentioned in the above paragraph are taken into account.
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>CONCLUSIONS
<BR>
<BR>In between the first 18 chapters and the Epilogue come the Conclusions.
<BR>
<BR>In answering the question ‘Is evolution true?’ (ie. ‘Did our bodies… actually descend from a common ancestor with the apes?’ - p.124), Birkett has two main responses; ‘It’s hard to say’ (as along with all emerging scientific theories, Darwinian evolution is open to debate and further development), and ‘It doesn’t really matter’ (‘Some physical process was involved in bringing us to our current biological state,’ ‘Evolutionary theory, true or not, is simply an interesting detail’ (p. 127, 129).).
<BR>
<BR>As I think her Epilogue conclusions are wrong (the Bible does speak about how we got here), and as, despite the philosophical arguments, ‘ordinary’ people really do use belief in evolution and millions of years as a legitimate reason to reject the existence of God, I therefore think that her conclusion ‘It doesn’t really matter’ has to be utterly wrong. Belief in species change and natural selection doesn’t really matter, but belief in millions of years does really matter.
<BR>