Thinking Out Loud with Alan Shlemon - Naturalism’s Only Option

Episode Date: March 9, 2019

Since February 12 was Darwin Day, Alan discusses Darwin’s contribution to the worldview of naturalism and explains why atheists had no choice but to accept evolution. Download the mp3...

February 12th was Darwin Day, which is a holiday that's devoted to celebrating Darwin's contribution to explaining how humans and animals quote-unquote arrived. Now, those who reject the idea of a creator god were, of course, super jubilant about their newfound creation stories once it was published in 1859 by Charles Darwin in his book on the origin of species. was published in 1859 by Charles Darwin in his book on the origin of species. Now, the problem with the evolutionary explanation, though, was that it was the only creation story that atheists would embrace, even if the evidence didn't support it. You see, during Darwin's day, Christians held a, what I call a complete worldview. You see, according to Christian theism, there are material things like planets and protons and giraffes, right? But there are also immaterial things like souls or angels and an all-powerful God who created the universe and all the creatures that inhabit the earth. Now, the atheist worldview, naturalism by contrast, was an incomplete worldview. You see, naturalism posits that nature

is all there is. Only physical or material things exist. So, for example, there are no souls, there's no gods or angels, and there's nothing immaterial. And atheists were mostly satisfied with their naturalistic worldview, but they lacked a compelling, what I call creation story, an account of how humans and animals got here. And even though atheists vigorously rejected the Christian account of creation, they probably had a kind of creation story envy, right? Because they didn't have a creation account to explain how everything got here. Now, of course, that all changed when Darwin came along, because he postulated that different species arrived not by divine intervention, but by evolution through natural

selection. Now, of course, at this moment, atheists were ecstatic because now they had a way to explain how life emerged on earth without appealing to God. Darwin had filled in the hole in naturalism's worldview, thereby making it complete, by making their worldview more complete. Now, the problem, though, is that atheists had no choice but to embrace this evolutionary explanation, even though the evidence didn't support it. And the reason is simple. Naturalism is a materialistic account of reality. Only physical things exist. And so if there's no God, then what could possibly explain how life emerged on Earth?

The answer must be some type of physical explanation. And that's precisely what evolution is. It's a materialistic, it's a physical explanation. is. It's a materialistic, it's a physical explanation. Now, what happens when scientists discover evidence that undermines evolutionary theory or supports the Christian story of creation? Well, the answer is simple. It's disqualified by definition. It's ruled inadmissible. And atheists have no choice but to accept Darwin's account because it's the only option they have. And atheists have no choice but to accept Darwin's account because it's the only option they have. And by the way, thoughtful evolutionists admit this point as well. Take, for example, Richard Lewontin.

He's a former Harvard University geneticist, a leading evolutionary thinker, and he's acknowledged this exact same point. And writing in the New York Review of Books, here's what Lewontin said. He said, 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 produce material explanations, no matter how counterintuitive. Now, this is a stunning admission, because remember that evolution is a material explanation. It's a creation story that only uses matter, not immaterial things like God, to explain life on earth. And so, Lewontin says that it's not scientific evidence that compels atheists to accept a material explanation. Rather, it's their adherence to naturalism and the belief that physical matter is all that exists.

And one would think that evolutionists, like other scientists, base their conclusions on evidence. Not so, writes Lewontin. Right? Lawontin. He says, remember, adherence to material causes is a priori, which is a Latin term that means believing in something without looking at empirical evidence. In other words, there is no piece of evidence or scientific test that leads him or others like him to believe that matter is all there is. It's not only presupposed as fact, but Lewontin claims that the belief in naturalism is absolute and therefore is not subject to counter evidence. Now, he goes on, this dogmatic belief in materialism, by the way, forces,

now that's the Lewontin's word, their belief in materialism forces atheists to accept material explanations like evolution. And that's why I said they had no choice but to accept Darwin's thesis. They also have no choice but to accept it now, because it's the only materialistic explanation that's available. And so, of course, by contrast, Christians who uphold a theistic worldview have the freedom to believe not only in material things, but also in immaterial things. And when a phenomenon requires an explanation, the Christian can follow the evidence where it leads, whether it has a material or an immaterial cause.