WHAT IS THE IMPACT OF THE THEORY OF EVOLUTION (TOE) ON MORALITY?

For one thing, TOE naturalism removes any possible objective basis for objective moral truth and laws. It also denies that there is any higher purpose to life. Consequently, the only meaning of life is the meaning that we subjectively create for ourselves. In fact, many evolutionists gladly admit this. Atheist evolutionist and philosopher, Michael Ruse, admits:

• The evolutionist’s claim… is that morality is subjective – it is all a question of human feelings and sentiments… We think morality has objective reference [to a moral reality outside of our own creation] even though it does not. (Evolutionary Ethics, Zygon, Vol. 21, no. 1; March 1986)

Therefore, whatever morality we have, we must create for ourselves. In view of this, Ethics Prof. David Anderson commented about the impact of TOE:

• Objective moral values and duties are no more real than the tooth fairy. (Salvo, Spring 2016, 26)

Some atheistic evolutionists go even further and deny the existence of freewill. The late evolutionary biologist, William Provine had written:

• What modern science tells us… is that human beings are very complex machines. There is no way that the evolutionary process as currently conceived can produce a being that is truly free to make choices.

• Free will as it is traditionally conceived… simply does not exist. (“Evolution and the Foundation of Ethics,” MBL Science, Vol. 3, no. 1, 28)

Anderson comments:

• Provine’s commitment to determinism simply lays waste to morality itself.

If we are nothing more than materials, and the actions of materials are all governed by the laws of science, there is no room for any consideration of freewill, which requires an extra-material explanation.

But if there is no freewill, then we could not have acted otherwise, and if we could not have acted otherwise, then we cannot be held guilty for what we have done. Consequently, ISIS is not guilty of their genocide, rapes, and kidnappings of women and young girls into sexual slavery. They could not have done otherwise. Their behaviors are exclusively the result of forces outside of their non-existent control.

Besides, they hadn’t broken any higher, universal, objective moral laws. Consequently, this is the way that the West is treating the Muslim refugees who are raping their way across Europe. Therefore, they are not accorded their full dignity as humans and are not held responsible for their behavior, since they are just a product of deterministic forces outside of their control.

Germany is now distributing condoms to them, reflecting the fact that they neither have any moral clarity or moral resolution to meaningfully confront these horrors and to protect the innocent.

Instead, Europe, under the influence of TOE, is further descending into moral relativistic confusion. These nations are even abandoning their traditional understanding of justice as merely their own chauvinistic beliefs. The Telegraph (March 28, 2016) reports:

• Teaching children fundamental British values is an act of “cultural supremacism”, teachers have said, as members of the National Union of Teachers (NUT) vote to replace the concept with one that includes “international rights”.

• However, teachers argue “fundamental British values” set an “inherent cultural supremacism, particularly in the context of multicultural schools and the wider picture of migration”.

TOE has eliminated from the discussion the question of whether the British concept of justice might include some vital objective truths about justice. It has also eliminated any possible objective rationale for Britain’s existence. God help us.