Robbie Eleazer
February 10, 2008
Bio 210 Dr. Waldvogel
Origins: A problematic nomenclature
Religion inherently determines the fundamental process in which the particular adherent views and accepts the world around him or her. How each individual interacts within society, how the individual views science, even how an individual votes in elections is often shaped by the religion in which they follow. The debate between creationists and evolutionists in America is a prime example of this disconnect between science and religion. The very use of the word origin in the title of Charles Darwin’s book, Origin of Species could be one of the major reasons that different religions accept or reject the ideas the book presents. The connotations of the word origin could be perceived differently from religion to religion, affecting and shaping their stance on evolution. Buddhism, Conservative fundamental Christianity and Hinduism present different creation myths, the nature of these myths provide a critical lens through which these religions view and process their conceptions of origin and innately differentiate their stance on evolution.
Evolution itself has changed from the early conceptions of Charles Darwin, it has been refined and more evidence supporting the theory has arisen. However, at its core, the theory of Evolution does not state, or intend to state how the world began. Evolution or perhaps as stated by Darwin, Natural Selection, simply states that “This preservation of favourable variations and the rejection of injurious variations, I call Natural Selection. Variations neither useful nor injurious would not be affected by natural selection, and would be left a fluctuating element, as perhaps we see in the species called polymorphic” (Darwin 1859). Though Evolution is silent on how the world began, how the world originates, it is quite clear on how different species originate, including man from lesser evolved species. This notion of change with variation has a dramatic impact on a person of faith, a person who is inherently affected by their religious views, which shapes their view of the world.
February 10, 2008
Bio 210 Dr. Waldvogel
Origins: A problematic nomenclature
Religion inherently determines the fundamental process in which the particular adherent views and accepts the world around him or her. How each individual interacts within society, how the individual views science, even how an individual votes in elections is often shaped by the religion in which they follow. The debate between creationists and evolutionists in America is a prime example of this disconnect between science and religion. The very use of the word origin in the title of Charles Darwin’s book, Origin of Species could be one of the major reasons that different religions accept or reject the ideas the book presents. The connotations of the word origin could be perceived differently from religion to religion, affecting and shaping their stance on evolution. Buddhism, Conservative fundamental Christianity and Hinduism present different creation myths, the nature of these myths provide a critical lens through which these religions view and process their conceptions of origin and innately differentiate their stance on evolution.
Evolution itself has changed from the early conceptions of Charles Darwin, it has been refined and more evidence supporting the theory has arisen. However, at its core, the theory of Evolution does not state, or intend to state how the world began. Evolution or perhaps as stated by Darwin, Natural Selection, simply states that “This preservation of favourable variations and the rejection of injurious variations, I call Natural Selection. Variations neither useful nor injurious would not be affected by natural selection, and would be left a fluctuating element, as perhaps we see in the species called polymorphic” (Darwin 1859). Though Evolution is silent on how the world began, how the world originates, it is quite clear on how different species originate, including man from lesser evolved species. This notion of change with variation has a dramatic impact on a person of faith, a person who is inherently affected by their religious views, which shapes their view of the world.
Buddhism is an interesting example of how religion fundamentally shapes the adherents way of life and way of thinking-a religion which does not focus on a divinity but rather on individual efforts in life (Baumann, Martin 2002). While many religions focus on a creation moment or myth, Buddhism relies on a cyclic universe. A universe which has no end and no beginning and a world which is not “real” but merely a transition point from one cycle to the cycle of enlightenment. This lack of an origin presents many of the 400 million modern day Buddhist with a conception of evolution that is positive and accepting. Their conceptions of the world are not changed by science or by evolution. Whether the world has a starting point, whether human kind has an origin is of no importance to a Buddhist. Their religious views, which shape their views of the world, are independent from science. However, I do not believe that this acceptance of evolution is a product of Buddhists being more intelligent or more open minded then other religious peoples- but of a powerful example of how when science does not contradict a religions conceptions of space and time, the adherents have no reason to fear its implications. Simply put, this cyclic universe, this cyclic state of mind is unaffected by Evolutionist’s theory that man had its origin in a lesser evolved species because in the mind of the Buddhist origin is a much more abstract concept which does not equal a creation moment. In the Buddhists quest for ultimate enlightenment evolution is merely a scientific theory which is credible and factual, a theory which does not bear on their conception of the world around them.
Christianity as a whole is an extremely diverse religion which consists of hundreds of segments and offshoots and two main divisions between Catholics and Protestants. Due to this varied and dynamic body of believers there is also a varied and dynamic view toward Evolutionary theory. In order to demonstrate the power of the word origin and its connection between religion and science, fundamental Christianity provides a more tangible outlet to analyze creation and evolution. Genesis 1 provides Fundamental (a term which I will be using for Christians who view the bible as a literal document, i.e. devoid of anything but singular meaning) Christians with a poetic and also concrete view of how the world originates with particular interest in how man is created. The very name “Genesis” means beginning or origin which begins to shape the minds of fundamental Christians from the very first reading of the book’s title (Speiser, E.A 1964). While the title is only a cursory indicator, the first 7 lines of Genesis cement the fundamental Christian’s understanding of the world, and his or her place in that world. Not only does Genesis state the order of creation as a fixed thing over a seven day period, God is even described as stating “I will make man in my image, after my likeness; let him subject the fish of the sea and the birds of the sky, the cattle and all the wild animals, and all creatures that creep on earth”. From a theological stand point, these three lines define man’s purpose on the earth and his relationship with his creator. After reading Genesis it is no stretch to imagine that a Fundamental Christian would be threatened by the theory of evolution. In a religion (rather a segment of the whole) which views their text as authoritative and unchallengeable, the ideas of origin become problematic for someone so defined by their creation. If science and evolution hold true, and humans have evolved through natural selection to our present state, it renders the statements in Genesis as false, toppling the individual’s conceptions of the Bible. Within evolution is the implication that man is not a special creature, not a creature purposefully created in the image of a creator to control the natural world- he becomes nothing more than a blade of grass or a harmless ant. Though evolution describes no creation event, it certainly describes the possible origins of man through evolution. It is this very origin that threatens the faith base of a fundamental Christian. The pair could not be more opposite in world view, the Buddhist and the Fundamental Christian: the Buddhist operates within a cyclic and changing world while the Christian operates in a fixed and defined world were change can be threatening. Clearly the idea and use of the word origin becomes a problematic nomenclature for the fundamental Christian.
The three religions of Buddhism, Christianity, and Hinduism (which itself is a problematic nomenclature, but another paper) provide an elegant comparison. Buddhism is essentially devoid of deities and therefore lacks a proper creation, leading to a more accepting view of science and of evolution. Christianity (fundamental) has a clear and specific creation of humans and the world providing a difficult acceptance of evolution. Hinduism is the final example specifically because it contains deities and a creation myth yet surprisingly generally accepts the notion of evolution.
The way in which a Hindu perceives the notion of evolution relates not only to the cultural notions of origin but also the concept of change within the religion. The religion is extremely varied from believer to believer in a much more fluid way then perhaps from a Catholic to a Protestant. Hindu deities are often “chosen” or followed based on family history or other regional forces creating a dynamic and meltingpot-esque religion. This variance allows Hinduism to be dynamic but without the inherent contradiction that usually accompanies change among sects. This condition is important to note because suddenly, even the very concept of origin is dynamic within one religion based on the deities in which the believer adheres. The Gods Brahma and Vishnu could be seen as creators-Brahma in a calm creation and Vishnu in a chaotic creation dance. Two Hindus could view the beginning of the world and human kind from very different strata. I believe that this dynamic yet fluid conception of the world is a prime example of how the religion of the individual not only affects its world view but also the acceptance of science. In the Hindu mind there does not seem to be an inherent contradiction between humans evolving or humans being created in a fixed point in time. On a more abstract spiritual level, Hindus believe in the evolution of humans to deities. This evolution of the spirit states that humans can achieve deity by being reborn into higher and higher beings, ultimately becoming divine (Baumann, Martin 2002). This evolution of the soul is almost perfectly in line with the theory of evolution, change over time. The 750 million Hindus represent 1/6th of the world’s population, yet the numbers are deceiving if Hinduism is viewed not as a solid system, but as a multifaceted system of deities and individuals.
Origin become a problematic nomenclature, loaded with double meanings and earth shattering possibilities depending on the religion you adhere. Following the major world traditions of Buddhism, Fundamental Christianity and Hinduism, origins can be perceived in very different manners. Evolutionary theory may never be accepted by some groups who link the creation of man with the purpose of an omnipotent creator. These groups cannot accept the theory if they intend to maintain their strict beliefs, such as those of the fundamental Christian. Yet, for others of equal fervor, evolution presents no problematic conception of origin because the very nature of origin is in a constant state of flux. The Buddhist can very well cycle through life both an individual on the path to enlightenment and an individual embracing evolutionary science. While still others find themselves with a rich and colorful tradition that tends to embrace “all truths”. A tradition that is not burdened by science but able to incorporate scientific progress seamlessly into their lives. The Buddhist, the Fundamental Christian, the Hindu cannot escape the way in which their religions shape the way they view the world. Because of this condition the scientific realm of Evolution, the concept of Origins has a profound implication on both the evolutionist and the religious believer.
Baumann, Martin. Religions of the World Volume 1 and 2. Santa Barbara, California. 2002
Speiser, E.A. The Anchor Bible Genesis.Garden City, NY.1964
No comments:
Post a Comment