|
|
The "selfish theory of human nature," which is a natural conclusion of Darwinism's "survival of the fittest," is an idea that is held up and esteemed by sociobiological theorists like E.O. Wilson and Richard Dawkins. Plainly stated, the idea is: since we're evolved from natural processes with no "supernatural" elements influencing our motivations or behaviors, then it follows that our every impulse and motivation must be entirely selfish (in a natural state), because that is the behavior dictated by Darwinian survival of the fittest.
This contradicts what we all witness in human behavior in real life (examples of altruism), but that doesn't stop some from trying to fit a square philosophical peg into a round reality hole. The book I'm reading right now lists some of the odd questions that the generation of the last 45 years or so feel compelled to ask, such as [paraphrased by me for brevity]: "Why didn't all young men flee to Canada during the Vietnam war, instead of just a few thousand?" "Why shouldn't a woman have as many abortions as she wants?" "What right does the government have to steal my money and call it 'taxation?' " "How can the Pope continue to oppose contraception? Doesn't he realize that over-population is ruining the environment?" The following passage is the astute observation of the author on this matter, with one time-related adjustment due to the book being published twenty years ago. The book was published posthumously in 1995 by the author's daughter Judith: "The folly which is common to the favorite questions of our time, and to the typical questions of the sociobiologists, lies in a certain presupposition which they have in common. That is, that human life, and indeed all animal life, is best understood by comparing with the model furnished by youngish American adults of the last [forty-five] years. By people, that is, who are, beyond all historic precedent, free, rich, mobile, innocent of the very idea (let alone the reality) of food shortage, under no necessity to work, unburdened by familial, religious, or other loyalties, undistracted by education, curiosity, or any disinterested passion, principally anxious (if male) to preserve a whole skin, and (if female) to preserve her immaternity. They (as the saying is) 'just want to have fun,' and are the first instance in history of an entire generation, as distinct from a tiny minority, being in a position to realize this challenging idea." --- Darwinian Fairytales by David Stove, p.123 David Stove was an atheist who believed in evolution, so his anti-Darwinist arguments can't be attributed to "creationism" nor any other religious agendas. |